2017
DOI: 10.1089/cmb.2016.0185
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A More Practical Algorithm for the Rooted Triplet Distance

Abstract: The rooted triplet distance is a measure of the dissimilarity of two phylogenetic trees with identical leaf label sets. An algorithm by Brodal et al. that computes it in [Formula: see text] time and [Formula: see text] space, where n is the number of leaf labels, has recently been implemented in the software package tqDist. In this article, we show that replacing the hierarchical decomposition tree used in Brodal et al.'s algorithm by a centroid paths-based data structure yields an [Formula: see text]-time and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The rooted triplet distance measures the dissimilarity between two leaf-labeled trees with identical labels. It is given by the number of rooted triplets that induce different minimal topologies ( Figure 1) in the two trees over the total number of triplets [28]. As tumor progression trees are fully-labeled, such metric cannot be directly applied: in this section we propose a novel similarity measure, inspired by the triplet distance, specifically designed for these more general trees.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rooted triplet distance measures the dissimilarity between two leaf-labeled trees with identical labels. It is given by the number of rooted triplets that induce different minimal topologies ( Figure 1) in the two trees over the total number of triplets [28]. As tumor progression trees are fully-labeled, such metric cannot be directly applied: in this section we propose a novel similarity measure, inspired by the triplet distance, specifically designed for these more general trees.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When k = 0 , both N 1 and N 2 are trees. This case has been extensively studied in the literature [4,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24], with the most efficient algorithms in theory and practice [19,20,24] running in O(n log n) time. For k = 1 , an O(n 2.687 )-time algorithm based on counting 3-cycles in an auxiliary graph was given in [17], and a faster, O(n log n)-time algorithm that transforms the input to a constant number of instances with k = 0 was given in [25].…”
Section: Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…degrees. Moreover, software implementations of the fast algorithms for k = 0 and k = 1 are available [20,[23][24][25].…”
Section: Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Results. All related work can be found in [5,1,14,3,15,9,10,11]. Previous and new results are shown in the table below.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous and new results are shown in the table below. For the cache oblivious model [8], the papers [5,1,14,3,10,11] do not provide an analysis, so here we provide an upper bound. The common main bottleneck with all previous approaches is that the data structures used rely intensively on Ω(n log n) random memory accesses.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%