Why is it hard to beat O(n2)O(n^2) for Longest Common Weakly Increasing Subsequence?

The Longest Common Weakly Increasing Subsequence problem (LCWIS) is a variant of the classic Longest Common Subsequence problem (LCS). Both problems can be solved with simple quadratic time algorithms. A recent line of research led to a number of matching conditional lower bounds for LCS and other related problems. However, the status of LCWIS remained open. In this paper we show that LCWIS cannot be solved in strongly subquadratic time unless the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH) is false. The ideas which we developed can also be used to obtain a lower bound based on a safer assumption of NC-SETH, i.e. a version of SETH which talks about NC circuits instead of less expressive CNF formulas

Bounds on the Number of Longest Common Subsequences

This paper performs the analysis necessary to bound the running time of known, efficient algorithms for generating all longest common subsequences. That is, we bound the running time as a function of input size for algorithms with time essentially proportional to the output size. This paper considers both the case of computing all distinct LCSs and the case of computing all LCS embeddings. Also included is an analysis of how much better the efficient algorithms are than the standard method of generating LCS embeddings. A full analysis is carried out with running times measured as a function of the total number of input characters, and much of the analysis is also provided for cases in which the two input sequences are of the same specified length or of two independently specified lengths.Comment: 13 pages. Corrected typos, corrected operation of hyperlinks, improved presentatio

Dynamic Set Intersection

Consider the problem of maintaining a family $F$ of dynamic sets subject to insertions, deletions, and set-intersection reporting queries: given $S,S'\in F$, report every member of $S\cap S'$ in any order. We show that in the word RAM model, where $w$ is the word size, given a cap $d$ on the maximum size of any set, we can support set intersection queries in $O(\frac{d}{w/\log^2 w})$ expected time, and updates in $O(\log w)$ expected time. Using this algorithm we can list all $t$ triangles of a graph $G=(V,E)$ in $O(m+\frac{m\alpha}{w/\log^2 w} +t)$ expected time, where $m=|E|$ and $\alpha$ is the arboricity of $G$. This improves a 30-year old triangle enumeration algorithm of Chiba and Nishizeki running in $O(m \alpha)$ time. We provide an incremental data structure on $F$ that supports intersection {\em witness} queries, where we only need to find {\em one} $e\in S\cap S'$. Both queries and insertions take O\paren{\sqrt \frac{N}{w/\log^2 w}} expected time, where $N=\sum_{S\in F} |S|$. Finally, we provide time/space tradeoffs for the fully dynamic set intersection reporting problem. Using $M$ words of space, each update costs $O(\sqrt {M \log N})$ expected time, each reporting query costs $O(\frac{N\sqrt{\log N}}{\sqrt M}\sqrt{op+1})$ expected time where $op$ is the size of the output, and each witness query costs $O(\frac{N\sqrt{\log N}}{\sqrt M} + \log N)$ expected time.Comment: Accepted to WADS 201