Paper detail

Quadratic-Time Hardness of LCS and other Sequence Similarity Measures

Two important similarity measures between sequences are the longest common subsequence (LCS) and the dynamic time warping distance (DTWD). The computations of these measures for two given sequences are central tasks in a variety of applications. Simple dynamic programming algorithms solve these tasks in $O(n^2)$ time, and despite an extensive amount of research, no algorithms with significantly better worst case upper bounds are known. In this paper, we show that an $O(n^{2-ε})$ time algorithm, for some $ε>0$, for computing the LCS or the DTWD of two sequences of length $n$ over a constant size alphabet, refutes the popular Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH). Moreover, we show that computing the LCS of $k$ strings over an alphabet of size $O(k)$ cannot be done in $O(n^{k-ε})$ time, for any $ε>0$, under SETH. Finally, we also address the time complexity of approximating the DTWD of two strings in truly subquadratic time.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.