Relaxed Agreement Forests
September 03, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Informatics
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Virginia Aardevol Martinez, Steven Chaplick, Steven Kelk, Ruben Meuwese, Matus Mihalak, Georgios Stamoulis
arXiv ID
2309.01110
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Cross-listed
q-bio.PE
Citations
1
Venue
Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Informatics
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
There are multiple factors which can cause the phylogenetic inference process to produce two or more conflicting hypotheses of the evolutionary history of a set X of biological entities. That is: phylogenetic trees with the same set of leaf labels X but with distinct topologies. This leads naturally to the goal of quantifying the difference between two such trees T_1 and T_2. Here we introduce the problem of computing a 'maximum relaxed agreement forest' (MRAF) and use this as a proxy for the dissimilarity of T_1 and T_2, which in this article we assume to be unrooted binary phylogenetic trees. MRAF asks for a partition of the leaf labels X into a minimum number of blocks S_1, S_2, ... S_k such that for each i, the subtrees induced in T_1 and T_2 by S_i are isomorphic up to suppression of degree-2 nodes and taking the labels X into account. Unlike the earlier introduced maximum agreement forest (MAF) model, the subtrees induced by the S_i are allowed to overlap. We prove that it is NP-hard to compute MRAF, by reducing from the problem of partitioning a permutation into a minimum number of monotonic subsequences (PIMS). Furthermore, we show that MRAF has a polynomial time O(log n)-approximation algorithm where n=|X| and permits exact algorithms with single-exponential running time. When at least one of the two input trees has a caterpillar topology, we prove that testing whether a MRAF has size at most k can be answered in polynomial time when k is fixed. We also note that on two caterpillars the approximability of MRAF is related to that of PIMS. Finally, we establish a number of bounds on MRAF, compare its behaviour to MAF both in theory and in an experimental setting and discuss a number of open problems.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted