Skip to main content

The Bounded Search Tree Algorithm for the Closest String Problem Has Quadratic Smoothed Complexity

  • Conference paper
Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science 2011 (MFCS 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 6907))

  • 881 Accesses

Abstract

Given a set S of n strings, each of length ℓ, and a non-negative value d, we define a center string as a string of length ℓ that has Hamming distance at most d from each string in S. The Closest String problem aims to determine whether there exists a center string for a given set of strings S and input parameters n, ℓ, and d. When n is relatively large with respect to ℓ then the basic majority algorithm solves the Closest String problem efficiently, and the problem can also be solved efficiently when either n, ℓ or d is reasonably small [12]. Hence, the only case for which there is no known efficient algorithm is when n is between logℓ/ loglogℓ and logℓ. Using smoothed analysis, we prove that such Closest String instances can be solved efficiently by the O(nℓ + nd ·d d)-time algorithm by Gramm et al. [13]. In particular, we show that for any given Closest String instance I, the expected running time of this algorithm on a small perturbation of I is \(O\left(n\ell + nd \cdot d^{2 + o(1)} \right)\).

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

Access this chapter

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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andoni, A., Indyk, P., Patrascu, M.: On the optimality of the dimensionality reduction method. In: Proc. of FOCS, pp. 449–456 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Andoni, A., Krauthgamer, R.: The smoothed complexity of edit distance. In: Aceto, L., Damgård, I., Goldberg, L.A., Halldórsson, M.M., Ingólfsdóttir, A., Walukiewicz, I. (eds.) ICALP 2008, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5125, pp. 357–369. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Banderier, C., Beier, R., Mehlhorn, K.: Smoothed analysis of three combinatorial problems. In: Rovan, B., Vojtáš, P. (eds.) MFCS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2747, pp. 198–207. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Ben-Dor, A., Lancia, G., Perone, J., Ravi, R.: Banishing bias from consensus strings. In: Hein, J., Apostolico, A. (eds.) CPM 1997. LNCS, vol. 1264, pp. 247–261. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chen, Z.-Z., Ma, B., Wang, L.: A three-string approach to the closest string problem. In: Thai, M.T., Sahni, S. (eds.) COCOON 2010. LNCS, vol. 6196, pp. 449–458. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Deng, X., Li, G., Li, Z., Ma, B., Wang, L.: Genetic design of drugs without side-effects. SIAM Journal on Computing 32(4), 1073–1090 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Dopazo, J., Rodríguez, A., Sáiz, J.C., Sobrino, F.: Design of primers for PCR amplification of highly variable genomes. Computer Applications in the Biosciences 9, 123–125 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Downey, R.G., Fellows, M.R.: Parameterized Complexity. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fellows, M.R., Gramm, J., Niedermeier, R.: On the parameterized intractability of CLOSEST SUBSTRING and related problems. In: Alt, H., Ferreira, A. (eds.) STACS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2285, pp. 262–273. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Fellows, M.R., Gramm, J., Niedermeier, R.: On the parameterized intractability of motif search problems. Combinatorica 26, 141–167 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Frances, M., Litman, A.: On covering problems of codes. Theory of Computing Systems 30(2), 113–119 (1997)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Gramm, J., Niedermeier, R., Rossmanith, P.: Exact solutions for CLOSEST STRING and related problems. In: Eades, P., Takaoka, T. (eds.) ISAAC 2001. LNCS, vol. 2223, p. 441. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Gramm, J., Niedermeier, R., Rossmanith, P.: Fixed-parameter algorithms for closest string and related problems. Algorithmica 37(1), 25–42 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Hufsky, F., Kuchenbecker, L., Jahn, K., Stoye, J., Böcker, S.: Swiftly computing center strings. BMC Bioinformatics 12(106) (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Konstantopoulos, T.: Ballot theorems revisited. Statistics and Probability Letters 24, 331–338 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Lanctot, J.K., Li, M., Ma, B., Wang, S., Zhang, L.: Distinguishing string selection problems. Information and Computation 185(1), 41–55 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Li, M., Ma, B., Wang, L.: Finding similar regions in many strings. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 65(1), 73–96 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Lokshtanov, D., Marx, D., Saurabh, S.: Slightly superexponential parameterized problems. In: Proc. of the 22nd SODA, pp. 760–776 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lucas, K., Busch, M., Össinger, S., Thompson, J.A.: An improved microcomputer program for finding gene- and gene family-specific oligonucleotides suitable as primers for polymerase chain reactions or as probes. Computer Applications in the Biosciences 7, 525–529 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ma, B.: Why greedy works for shortest common superstring problem. In: Proc.of CPM, pp. 244–254 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ma, B., Sun, X.: More efficient algorithms for closest string and substring problems. SIAM Journal on Computing 39, 1432–1443 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Ma, B., Tromp, J., Li, M.: PatternHunter: faster and more sensitive homology search. Bioinformatics 18(3), 440–445 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Manthey, B., Reischuk, R.: Smoothed analysis of binary search trees. Theoretical Computer Science 3(378), 292–315 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Pavesi, G., Mauri, G., Pesole, G.: An algorithm for finding signals of unknown length in DNA sequences. Bioinformatics 214, S207–S214 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pevzner, P., Sze, S.: Combinatorial approaches to finding subtle signals in DNA strings. In: Proc.of 8th ISMB, pp. 269–278 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Proutski, V., Holme, E.C.: Primer master: A new program for the design and analyiss of PCR primers. Computer Applications in the Biosciences 12, 253–255 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Spielman, D.A., Teng, S.-H.: Smoothed analysis of algorithms: why the simplex algorithm ususally takes polynomial time. Journal of the ACM 51, 296–305 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Tompa, M., et al.: Assessing computational tools for the discovery of transcription factor binding sites. Nature 23(1), 137–144 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Wang, L., Zhu, B.: Efficient algorithms for the closest string and distinguishing string selection problems. In: Proc. of 3rd FAW, vol. 270, pp. 261–270 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Zhao, R., Zhang, N.: A more efficient closest string algorithm. In: Proc. of 2nd BICoB, pp. 210–215 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag GmbH Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Boucher, C. (2011). The Bounded Search Tree Algorithm for the Closest String Problem Has Quadratic Smoothed Complexity. In: Murlak, F., Sankowski, P. (eds) Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science 2011. MFCS 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6907. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22993-0_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22993-0_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-22992-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-22993-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics