-
Text Indexing for Long Patterns using Locally Consistent Anchors
Authors:
Lorraine A. K. Ayad,
Grigorios Loukides,
Solon P. Pissis
Abstract:
In many real-world database systems, a large fraction of the data is represented by strings: sequences of letters over some alphabet. This is because strings can easily encode data arising from different sources. It is often crucial to represent such string datasets in a compact form but also to simultaneously enable fast pattern matching queries. This is the classic text indexing problem. The fou…
▽ More
In many real-world database systems, a large fraction of the data is represented by strings: sequences of letters over some alphabet. This is because strings can easily encode data arising from different sources. It is often crucial to represent such string datasets in a compact form but also to simultaneously enable fast pattern matching queries. This is the classic text indexing problem. The four absolute measures anyone should pay attention to when designing or implementing a text index are: (i) index space; (ii) query time; (iii) construction space; and (iv) construction time. Unfortunately, however, most (if not all) widely-used indexes (e.g., suffix tree, suffix array, or their compressed counterparts) are not optimized for all four measures simultaneously, as it is difficult to have the best of all four worlds. Here, we take an important step in this direction by showing that text indexing with sampling based on locally consistent anchors (lc-anchors) offers remarkably good performance in all four measures, when we have at hand a lower bound $\ell$ on the length of the queried patterns -- which is arguably a quite reasonable assumption in practical applications. Our index offers average-case guarantees. In our experiments using real benchmark datasets, we show that it compares favorably based on the four measures to all classic indexes: (compressed) suffix tree; (compressed) suffix array; and the FM-index. Notably, we also present a counterpart of our index with worst-case guarantees based on the lc-anchors notion of partitioning sets. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first index achieving the best of all worlds in the regime where we have at hand a lower bound $\ell$ on the length of the queried patterns.
△ Less
Submitted 16 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
Minimizing the Minimizers via Alphabet Reordering
Authors:
Hilde Verbeek,
Lorraine A. K. Ayad,
Grigorios Loukides,
Solon P. Pissis
Abstract:
Minimizers sampling is one of the most widely-used mechanisms for sampling strings [Roberts et al., Bioinformatics 2004]. Let $S=S[1]\ldots S[n]$ be a string over a totally ordered alphabet $Σ$. Further let $w\geq 2$ and $k\geq 1$ be two integers. The minimizer of $S[i\mathinner{.\,.} i+w+k-2]$ is the smallest position in $[i,i+w-1]$ where the lexicographically smallest length-$k$ substring of…
▽ More
Minimizers sampling is one of the most widely-used mechanisms for sampling strings [Roberts et al., Bioinformatics 2004]. Let $S=S[1]\ldots S[n]$ be a string over a totally ordered alphabet $Σ$. Further let $w\geq 2$ and $k\geq 1$ be two integers. The minimizer of $S[i\mathinner{.\,.} i+w+k-2]$ is the smallest position in $[i,i+w-1]$ where the lexicographically smallest length-$k$ substring of $S[i\mathinner{.\,.} i+w+k-2]$ starts. The set of minimizers over all $i\in[1,n-w-k+2]$ is the set $\mathcal{M}_{w,k}(S)$ of the minimizers of $S$. We consider the following basic problem: Given $S$, $w$, and $k$, can we efficiently compute a total order on $Σ$ that minimizes $|\mathcal{M}_{w,k}(S)|$? We show that this is unlikely by proving that the problem is NP-hard for any $w\geq 2$ and $k\geq 1$. Our result provides theoretical justification as to why there exist no exact algorithms for minimizing the minimizers samples, while there exists a plethora of heuristics for the same purpose.
△ Less
Submitted 7 May, 2024;
originally announced May 2024.
-
Sparse Suffix and LCP Array: Simple, Direct, Small, and Fast
Authors:
Lorraine A. K. Ayad,
Grigorios Loukides,
Solon P. Pissis,
Hilde Verbeek
Abstract:
Sparse suffix sorting is the problem of sorting $b=o(n)$ suffixes of a string of length $n$. Efficient sparse suffix sorting algorithms have existed for more than a decade. Despite the multitude of works and their justified claims for applications in text indexing, the existing algorithms have not been employed by practitioners. Arguably this is because there are no simple, direct, and efficient a…
▽ More
Sparse suffix sorting is the problem of sorting $b=o(n)$ suffixes of a string of length $n$. Efficient sparse suffix sorting algorithms have existed for more than a decade. Despite the multitude of works and their justified claims for applications in text indexing, the existing algorithms have not been employed by practitioners. Arguably this is because there are no simple, direct, and efficient algorithms for sparse suffix array construction. We provide two new algorithms for constructing the sparse suffix and LCP arrays that are simultaneously simple, direct, small, and fast. In particular, our algorithms are: simple in the sense that they can be implemented using only basic data structures; direct in the sense that the output arrays are not a byproduct of constructing the sparse suffix tree or an LCE data structure; fast in the sense that they run in $\mathcal{O}(n\log b)$ time, in the worst case, or in $\mathcal{O}(n)$ time, when the total number of suffixes with an LCP value greater than $2^{\lfloor \log \frac{n}{b} \rfloor + 1}-1$ is in $\mathcal{O}(b/\log b)$, matching the time of the optimal yet much more complicated algorithms [Gawrychowski and Kociumaka, SODA 2017; Birenzwige et al., SODA 2020]; and small in the sense that they can be implemented using only $8b+o(b)$ machine words. Our algorithms are non-trivial space-efficient adaptations of the Monte Carlo algorithm by I et al. for constructing the sparse suffix tree in $\mathcal{O}(n\log b)$ time [STACS 2014]. We provide extensive experiments to justify our claims on simplicity and on efficiency.
△ Less
Submitted 4 July, 2024; v1 submitted 13 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Constructing Antidictionaries in Output-Sensitive Space
Authors:
Lorraine A. K. Ayad,
Golnaz Badkobeh,
Gabriele Fici,
Alice Héliou,
Solon P. Pissis
Abstract:
A word $x$ that is absent from a word $y$ is called minimal if all its proper factors occur in $y$. Given a collection of $k$ words $y_1,y_2,\ldots,y_k$ over an alphabet $Σ$, we are asked to compute the set $\mathrm{M}^{\ell}_{y_{1}\#\ldots\#y_{k}}$ of minimal absent words of length at most $\ell$ of word $y=y_1\#y_2\#\ldots\#y_k$, $\#\notinΣ$. In data compression, this corresponds to computing th…
▽ More
A word $x$ that is absent from a word $y$ is called minimal if all its proper factors occur in $y$. Given a collection of $k$ words $y_1,y_2,\ldots,y_k$ over an alphabet $Σ$, we are asked to compute the set $\mathrm{M}^{\ell}_{y_{1}\#\ldots\#y_{k}}$ of minimal absent words of length at most $\ell$ of word $y=y_1\#y_2\#\ldots\#y_k$, $\#\notinΣ$. In data compression, this corresponds to computing the antidictionary of $k$ documents. In bioinformatics, it corresponds to computing words that are absent from a genome of $k$ chromosomes. This computation generally requires $Ω(n)$ space for $n=|y|$ using any of the plenty available $\mathcal{O}(n)$-time algorithms. This is because an $Ω(n)$-sized text index is constructed over $y$ which can be impractical for large $n$. We do the identical computation incrementally using output-sensitive space. This goal is reasonable when $||\mathrm{M}^{\ell}_{y_{1}\#\ldots\#y_{N}}||=o(n)$, for all $N\in[1,k]$. For instance, in the human genome, $n \approx 3\times 10^9$ but $||\mathrm{M}^{12}_{y_{1}\#\ldots\#y_{k}}|| \approx 10^6$. We consider a constant-sized alphabet for stating our results. We show that all $\mathrm{M}^{\ell}_{y_{1}},\ldots,\mathrm{M}^{\ell}_{y_{1}\#\ldots\#y_{k}}$ can be computed in $\mathcal{O}(kn+\sum^{k}_{N=1}||\mathrm{M}^{\ell}_{y_{1}\#\ldots\#y_{N}}||)$ total time using $\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{MaxIn}+\mathrm{MaxOut})$ space, where $\mathrm{MaxIn}$ is the length of the longest word in $\{y_1,\ldots,y_{k}\}$ and $\mathrm{MaxOut}=\max\{||\mathrm{M}^{\ell}_{y_{1}\#\ldots\#y_{N}}||:N\in[1,k]\}$. Proof-of-concept experimental results are also provided confirming our theoretical findings and justifying our contribution.
△ Less
Submitted 13 February, 2019;
originally announced February 2019.
-
Longest Property-Preserved Common Factor
Authors:
Lorraine A. K Ayad,
Giulia Bernardini,
Roberto Grossi,
Costas S. Iliopoulos,
Nadia Pisanti,
Solon P. Pissis,
Giovanna Rosone
Abstract:
In this paper we introduce a new family of string processing problems. We are given two or more strings and we are asked to compute a factor common to all strings that preserves a specific property and has maximal length. Here we consider three fundamental string properties: square-free factors, periodic factors, and palindromic factors under three different settings, one per property. In the firs…
▽ More
In this paper we introduce a new family of string processing problems. We are given two or more strings and we are asked to compute a factor common to all strings that preserves a specific property and has maximal length. Here we consider three fundamental string properties: square-free factors, periodic factors, and palindromic factors under three different settings, one per property. In the first setting, we are given a string $x$ and we are asked to construct a data structure over $x$ answering the following type of on-line queries: given string $y$, find a longest square-free factor common to $x$ and $y$. In the second setting, we are given $k$ strings and an integer $1 < k'\leq k$ and we are asked to find a longest periodic factor common to at least $k'$ strings. In the third setting, we are given two strings and we are asked to find a longest palindromic factor common to the two strings. We present linear-time solutions for all settings. We anticipate that our paradigm can be extended to other string properties or settings.
△ Less
Submitted 4 October, 2018;
originally announced October 2018.
-
Longest Common Prefixes with $k$-Errors and Applications
Authors:
Lorraine A. K. Ayad,
Panagiotis Charalampopoulos,
Costas S. Iliopoulos,
Solon P. Pissis
Abstract:
Although real-world text datasets, such as DNA sequences, are far from being uniformly random, average-case string searching algorithms perform significantly better than worst-case ones in most applications of interest. In this paper, we study the problem of computing the longest prefix of each suffix of a given string of length $n$ over a constant-sized alphabet that occurs elsewhere in the strin…
▽ More
Although real-world text datasets, such as DNA sequences, are far from being uniformly random, average-case string searching algorithms perform significantly better than worst-case ones in most applications of interest. In this paper, we study the problem of computing the longest prefix of each suffix of a given string of length $n$ over a constant-sized alphabet that occurs elsewhere in the string with $k$-errors. This problem has already been studied under the Hamming distance model. Our first result is an improvement upon the state-of-the-art average-case time complexity for non-constant $k$ and using only linear space under the Hamming distance model. Notably, we show that our technique can be extended to the edit distance model with the same time and space complexities. Specifically, our algorithms run in $\mathcal{O}(n \log^k n \log \log n)$ time on average using $\mathcal{O}(n)$ space. We show that our technique is applicable to several algorithmic problems in computational biology and elsewhere.
△ Less
Submitted 13 January, 2018;
originally announced January 2018.
