A binary string transmitted via a memoryless i.i.d. deletion channel is received as a subsequence of the original input. From this, one obtains a posterior distribution on the channel input, corresponding to a set of candidate supersequences weighted by the number of times the received subsequence can be embedded in them. In a previous work it is conjectured on the basis of experimental data that the entropy of the posterior is minimized and maximized by the constant and the alternating strings, respectively. In this work, we present an algorithm for counting the number of subsequence embeddings using a run-length encoding of strings. We then describe two different ways of clustering the space of supersequences and prove that their cardinality depends only on the length of the received subsequence and its Hamming weight, but not its exact form. Then, we consider supersequences that contain a single embedding of a fixed subsequence, referred to as singletons, and provide a closed form expression for enumerating them using the same run-length encoding. We prove an analogous result for the minimization and maximization of the number of singletons, by the alternating and the uniform strings, respectively. Next, we prove the original minimal entropy conjecture for the special cases of single and double deletions using similar clustering techniques and the same run-length encoding, which allow us to characterize the distribution of the number of subsequence embeddings in the space of compatible supersequences to demonstrate the effect of an entropy decreasing operation.
Studies involving subsequences and supersequences encompass a wide variety of problems that arise in various contexts such as formal languages, coding theory, computer intrusion detection and DNA sequencing to name a few. Despite their prevalence in such a wide range of disciplines, they remain largely unexplored and still present a considerable wealth of unanswered questions. In the realm of stringology and formal languages, the problem of determining the number of distinct subsequences obtainable from a fixed number of deletions, and closely related problems, have been studied extensively in @cite_26 @cite_24 @cite_5 @cite_15 . Perhaps it is worth noting that the same entropy minimizing and maximizing strings conjectured in @cite_22 and characterized in the present work, have been shown to lead to the minimum and maximum number of distinct subsequences, respectively. The problems of finding shortest common supersequences (SCS) and longest common subsequences (LCS) represent two well-known NP-hard problems @cite_6 @cite_9 @cite_0 that involve subproblems similar to our work. Finally, devising efficient algorithms for subsequence combinatorics based on dynamic programming for counting the number of occurrences of a subsequence in DNA sequencing is yet another important and closely related line of research @cite_3 @cite_19 .
@cite_26 @cite_22 @cite_9 @cite_6 @cite_3 @cite_24 @cite_0 @cite_19 @cite_5 @cite_15
1966413154 2243636408 2053947195 2010260400 2583824051 1559523984 2030628018 2007300759 1502626542 186393191
Abstract In this paper we investigate the complexity of finding various kinds of common super- and subsequences with respect to one or two given sets of strings. We show that Longest Minimal Common Supersequence, Shortest Maximal Common Subsequence, and Shortest Maximal Common Non-Supersequence are MAX SNP-hard over a binary alphabet. Moreover, we show that Shortest Common Supersequence, Longest Common Subsequence, Longest Common Non-Supersequence, Shortest Common Non-Subsequence, and Longest Minimal Common Non-Supersequence are MAX SNP-hard over a binary alphabet if the number of zeros is fixed (by the instance). We show how these problems can be related to finding sequences consistent with respect to two given sets of strings. This leads to a unified approach for characterizing the complexity of such problems. A citing sentence is one that appears in a scientific article and cites previous work. Citing sentences have been studied and used in many applications. For example, they have been used in scientific paper summarization, automatic survey generation, paraphrase identification, and citation function classification. Citing sentences that cite multiple papers are common in scientific writing. This observation should be taken into consideration when using citing sentences in applications. For instance, when a citing sentence is used in a summary of a scientific paper, only the fragments of the sentence that are relevant to the summarized paper should be included in the summary. In this paper, we present and compare three different approaches for identifying the fragments of a citing sentence that are related to a given target reference. Our methods are: word classification, sequence labeling, and segment classification. Our experiments show that segment classification achieves the best results. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations.Design methodology approach – ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets – a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self‐citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation – using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database.Findings – ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited ... A subsequence is obtained from a string by deleting any number of characters; thus in contrast to a substring, a subsequence is not necessarily a contiguous part of the string. Counting subsequences under various constraints has become relevant to biological sequence analysis, to machine learning, to coding theory, to the analysis of categorical time series in the social sciences, and to the theory of word complexity. We present theorems that lead to efficient dynamic programming algorithms to count (1) distinct subsequences in a string, (2) distinct common subsequences of two strings, (3) matching joint embeddings in two strings, (4) distinct subsequences with a given minimum span, and (5) sequences generated by a string allowing characters to come in runs of a length that is bounded from above.