2015
DOI: 10.1007/s00453-015-0087-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Approximating Maximum Agreement Forest on Multiple Binary Trees

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Chen et al (2015) an FPT algorithm for rooted SPR, with complexity O(2.344 k · n) is presented, which is an improvement compared to O(2.42 k · n) (Whidden et al 2010). Rooted SPR is investigated also for non binary trees (Whidden et al 2016), and MAF for multiple trees (Chen et al 2016). For a more complete review see Shi et al (2013) and Whidden et al (2016).…”
Section: A Review Of Previous Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Chen et al (2015) an FPT algorithm for rooted SPR, with complexity O(2.344 k · n) is presented, which is an improvement compared to O(2.42 k · n) (Whidden et al 2010). Rooted SPR is investigated also for non binary trees (Whidden et al 2016), and MAF for multiple trees (Chen et al 2016). For a more complete review see Shi et al (2013) and Whidden et al (2016).…”
Section: A Review Of Previous Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the Maximum Agreement Forest problem on multiple rooted binary phylogenetic trees, Chataigner [33] presented a polynomial-time approximation algorithm of ratio 8. Recently, Mukhopadhyay and Bhabak [34] and Chen et al [35], independently, developed two 3-approximation algorithms. The running times of the two algorithms in [34] and [35] are O(n 2 m 2 ) and O(nm log n) respectively, where n denotes the number of leaves in each phylogenetic tree, and m denotes the number of phylogenetic trees in the input instance.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, Mukhopadhyay and Bhabak [34] and Chen et al [35], independently, developed two 3-approximation algorithms. The running times of the two algorithms in [34] and [35] are O(n 2 m 2 ) and O(nm log n) respectively, where n denotes the number of leaves in each phylogenetic tree, and m denotes the number of phylogenetic trees in the input instance. For the Maximum Agreement Forest problem on multiple unrooted binary trees, Chen et al [35] presented a 4-approximation algorithm with running time O(nm log n) .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The problem has attracted a lot of attention, and indeed has become a canonical problem in the field of phylogenetic networks. Many variants of MAF have been studied, including versions where the input consists of more than two trees [6,7], and where the input trees are unrooted [27,26] or non-binary [20,25]. We will concentrate on MAF in its classical form with two rooted binary input trees, and we will be concerned with the worst-case approximability of the problem.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%