Skip to main content

Finding Smallest Supertrees Under Minor Containment

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1665))

Abstract

The diversity of application areas relying on tree-structured data results in a wide interest in algorithms which determine differences or similarities among trees. One way of measuring the similarity between trees is to find the smallest common superstructure or supertree, where common elements are typically defined in terms of a mapping or embedding. In the simplest case, a supertree will contain exact copies of each input tree, so that for each input tree, each vertex of a tree can be mapped to a vertex in the supertree such that each edge maps to the corresponding edge. More general mappings allow for the extraction of more subtle common elements captured by looser definitions of similarity. We consider supertrees under the general mapping of minor containment. Minor containment generalizes both subgraph isomorphism and topological embedding; as a consequence of this generality, however, it is NP-complete to determine whether or not G is a minor of H, even for general trees. By focusing on trees of bounded degree, we obtain an O(n 3) algorithm which determines the smallest tree T such that both of the input trees are minors of T, even when the trees are assumed to be unrooted and unordered.

Research supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. The research of the third author was partially supported by the Ministry of Education and Culture of Spain — Grant no MEC-DGES SB97 0K148809.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A. Amir and D. Keselman. Maximum agreement subtree in a set of evolutionary trees: metrics and efficient algorithms. SIAM Journal on Computing, 26(6):1656–1669, December 1997. 304

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. J. A. Bondy and U.S.R. Murty. Graph Theory with Applications. North-Holland, 1976. 304

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. J. Chung. O(n 2.5) time algorithms for the subgraph homeomorphism problem on trees. Journal of Algorithms, 8:106–112, 1987. 304

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Richard Cole and Ramesh Hariharan. An O(n log n) algorithm for the maximum agreement subtree problem for binary trees. In Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 323–332, 1996. 304

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. Dubiner, Z. Galil, and E. Magen. Faster tree pattern matching. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 145–150, 1990. 304

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. Duchet. Tree minors. Presentation at AMS-IMS-SIAM Joint Summer Research Conference on Graph Minors, 1991 (personal communication, A. Gupta). 304, 305

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Farach, T. Przytycka, and M. Thorup. On the agreement of many trees. Information Processing Letters, 55(6):297–301, 1995. 304

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. M. Farach and M. Thorup. Fast comparison of evolutionary trees. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 481–488, 1994. 304

    Google Scholar 

  9. A. Gupta and N. Nishimura. The parallel complexity of tree embedding problems. Journal of Algorithms, 18(1):176–200, 1995. 304, 304, 311

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. A. Gupta and N. Nishimura. Finding largest subtrees and smallest supertrees. Algorithmica, 21:183–210, 1998. 304, 304

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. A. Gupta, N. Nishimura, A. Proskurowski, and P. Ragde. Embeddings of k-connected graphs of pathwidth k. Manuscript. 311

    Google Scholar 

  12. T. Jiang, L. Wang, and K. Zhang. Alignment of trees-an alternative to tree edit. In Combinatorial Pattern Matching, pages 75–86, 1994. 304, 304, 304

    Google Scholar 

  13. P. Kilpeläinen and H. Mannila. Ordered and unordered tree inclusion. SIAM Journal on Computing, 24(2):340–356, 1995. 304

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. S. R. Kosaraju. Efficient tree pattern matching. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 178–183, 1989. 304

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Lagergren. The size of an intertwine. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, volume 820 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 520–531, 1994. 311

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. Matoušek and R. Thomas. On the complexity of finding iso-and other morphisms for partial k-trees. Discrete Mathematics, 108:343–364, 1992. 311

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. N. Robertson and P. Seymour. Graph minors II. Algorithmic aspects of tree-width. Journal of Algorithms, 7:309–322, 1986. 304

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. K. Siddiqi, A. Shokoufandeh, S. Dickinson, and S. Zucker. Shock graphs and shape matching. International Journal of Computer Vision, to appear. 303

    Google Scholar 

  19. T. Warnow. Tree compatibility and inferring evolutionary history. In Proceedings of the Fourth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 382–391, 1993. 304, 304, 304

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Nishimura, N., Ragde, P., Thilikos, D.M. (1999). Finding Smallest Supertrees Under Minor Containment. In: Widmayer, P., Neyer, G., Eidenbenz, S. (eds) Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science. WG 1999. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1665. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46784-X_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46784-X_29

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-66731-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46784-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics