2016
DOI: 10.1007/s00453-016-0192-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the Succinct Representation of Equivalence Classes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, for the case when G ∈ C is not connected, we extend the above idea as follows. We first encode all the connected components of G separately, and encoding the sizes of the connected components using the encoding of [10,26] using at most O( √ n) additional bits. This implies we can still encode G in succinct space even if G is not connected.…”
Section: Graph Representation Using Tree Coveringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, for the case when G ∈ C is not connected, we extend the above idea as follows. We first encode all the connected components of G separately, and encoding the sizes of the connected components using the encoding of [10,26] using at most O( √ n) additional bits. This implies we can still encode G in succinct space even if G is not connected.…”
Section: Graph Representation Using Tree Coveringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, for the case when G ∈ C is not connected, we extend the above idea as follows. We first encode all the connected components of G separately, and encoding the sizes of the connected components using the encoding of [9,25] using at most O( √ n) additional bits. This implies we can still encode G in succinct space even if G is not connected.…”
Section: Graph Representation Using Tree Coveringmentioning
confidence: 99%