Heaviest Increasing/Common Subsequence Problems

In this paper, we define the heaviest increasing subsequence (HIS) and heaviest common subsequence (HCS) problems as natural generalizations of the well-studied longest increasing subsequence (LIS) and longest common subsequence (LCS) problems. We show how the famous Robinson-Schensted correspondence between permutations and pairs of Young tableaux can be extended to compute heaviest increasing subsequences. Then, we point out a simple weight-preserving correspondence between the HIS and HCS problems. ? From this duality between the two problems, the Hunt-Szymanski LCS algorithm can be seen as a special case of the Robinson-Schensted algorithm. Our HIS algorithm immediately gives rise to a Hunt-Szymanski type of algorithm for HCS with the same time complexity. When weights are position-independent, we can exploit the structure inherent in the HIS-HCS correspondence to further refine the algorithm. This gives rise to a specialized HCS algorithm of the same type as the Apostolico-Guerra LCS algorithm.

[1]  M. W. Du,et al.  New Algorithms for the LCS Problem , 1984, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[2]  Daniel S. Hirschberg,et al.  Algorithms for the Longest Common Subsequence Problem , 1977, JACM.

[3]  Michael J. Fischer,et al.  The String-to-String Correction Problem , 1974, JACM.

[4]  Robert E. Tarjan,et al.  Self-adjusting binary trees , 1983, STOC.

[5]  C. Schensted.  Longest Increasing and Decreasing Subsequences , 1961, Canadian Journal of Mathematics.

[6]  Kiem-Phong Vo,et al.  Tableaux and Matrix Correspondences , 1983, J. Comb. Theory A.

[7]  Donald Ervin Knuth,et al.  The Art of Computer Programming , 1968 .

[8]  G. de B. Robinson,et al.  On the Representations of the Symmetric Group , 1938 .

[9]  Endre Szemerédi,et al.  Short cycles in directed graphs , 1983, J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B.

[10]  R. Stanley.  Theory and Application of Plane Partitions. Part 2 , 1971 .

[11]  David Sankoff,et al.  Time Warps, String Edits, and Macromolecules: The Theory and Practice of Sequence Comparison , 1983 .

[12]  E. Gansner,et al.  Matrix correspondences and the enumeration of plane partitions. , 1978 .

[13]  Alfred V. Aho,et al.  Bounds on the Complexity of the Longest Common Subsequence Problem , 1976, J. ACM.

[14]  Michael L. Fredman,et al.  On computing the length of longest increasing subsequences , 1975, Discret. Math..

[15]  Robert E. Tarjan,et al.  Self-adjusting binary search trees , 1985, JACM.

[16]  Francis Y. L. Chin,et al.  A fast algorithm for computing longest common subsequences of small alphabet size , 1989 .

[17]  Eugene W. Myers,et al.  An O(NP) Sequence Comparison Algorithm , 1990, Inf. Process. Lett..

[18]  Daniel S. Hirschberg,et al.  A linear space algorithm for computing maximal common subsequences , 1975, Commun. ACM.

[19]  Thomas G. Szymanski,et al.  A fast algorithm for computing longest common subsequences , 1977, CACM.

[20]  M. Golumbic.  Algorithmic graph theory and perfect graphs , 1980 .

[21]  Mike Paterson,et al.  A Faster Algorithm Computing String Edit Distances , 1980, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[22]  M. Golumbic.  CHAPTER 3 – Perfect Graphs , 1980 .