A simple and optimal ancestry labeling scheme for trees

We present a $\lg n + 2 \lg \lg n+3$ ancestry labeling scheme for trees. The problem was first presented by Kannan et al. [STOC 88'] along with a simple $2 \lg n$ solution. Motivated by applications to XML files, the label size was improved incrementally over the course of more than 20 years by a series of papers. The last, due to Fraigniaud and Korman [STOC 10'], presented an asymptotically optimal $\lg n + 4 \lg \lg n+O(1)$ labeling scheme using non-trivial tree-decomposition techniques. By providing a framework generalizing interval based labeling schemes, we obtain a simple, yet asymptotically optimal solution to the problem. Furthermore, our labeling scheme is attained by a small modification of the original $2 \lg n$ solution.Comment: 12 pages, 1 figure. To appear at ICALP'1

Sublinear Distance Labeling

A distance labeling scheme labels the $n$ nodes of a graph with binary strings such that, given the labels of any two nodes, one can determine the distance in the graph between the two nodes by looking only at the labels. A $D$-preserving distance labeling scheme only returns precise distances between pairs of nodes that are at distance at least $D$ from each other. In this paper we consider distance labeling schemes for the classical case of unweighted graphs with both directed and undirected edges. We present a $O(\frac{n}{D}\log^2 D)$ bit $D$-preserving distance labeling scheme, improving the previous bound by Bollob\'as et. al. [SIAM J. Discrete Math. 2005]. We also give an almost matching lower bound of $\Omega(\frac{n}{D})$. With our $D$-preserving distance labeling scheme as a building block, we additionally achieve the following results: 1. We present the first distance labeling scheme of size $o(n)$ for sparse graphs (and hence bounded degree graphs). This addresses an open problem by Gavoille et. al. [J. Algo. 2004], hereby separating the complexity from distance labeling in general graphs which require $\Omega(n)$ bits, Moon [Proc. of Glasgow Math. Association 1965]. 2. For approximate $r$-additive labeling schemes, that return distances within an additive error of $r$ we show a scheme of size $O\left ( \frac{n}{r} \cdot\frac{\operatorname{polylog} (r\log n)}{\log n} \right )$ for $r \ge 2$. This improves on the current best bound of $O\left(\frac{n}{r}\right)$ by Alstrup et. al. [SODA 2016] for sub-polynomial $r$, and is a generalization of a result by Gawrychowski et al. [arXiv preprint 2015] who showed this for $r=2$.Comment: A preliminary version of this paper appeared at ESA'1

A Comparative Study: Change Detection and Querying Dynamic XML Documents

The efficient management of the dynamic XML documents is a complex area of research. The changes and size of the XML documents throughout its lifetime are limitless. Change detection is an important part of version management to identify difference between successive versions of a document. Document content is continuously evolving. Users wanted to be able to query previous versions, query changes in documents, as well as to retrieve a particular document version efficiently. In this paper we provide comprehensive comparative analysis of various control schemes for change detection and querying dynamic XML documents

Distance labeling schemes for trees

We consider distance labeling schemes for trees: given a tree with $n$ nodes, label the nodes with binary strings such that, given the labels of any two nodes, one can determine, by looking only at the labels, the distance in the tree between the two nodes. A lower bound by Gavoille et. al. (J. Alg. 2004) and an upper bound by Peleg (J. Graph Theory 2000) establish that labels must use $\Theta(\log^2 n)$ bits\footnote{Throughout this paper we use $\log$ for $\log_2$.}. Gavoille et. al. (ESA 2001) show that for very small approximate stretch, labels use $\Theta(\log n \log \log n)$ bits. Several other papers investigate various variants such as, for example, small distances in trees (Alstrup et. al., SODA'03). We improve the known upper and lower bounds of exact distance labeling by showing that $\frac{1}{4} \log^2 n$ bits are needed and that $\frac{1}{2} \log^2 n$ bits are sufficient. We also give ($1+\epsilon$)-stretch labeling schemes using $\Theta(\log n)$ bits for constant $\epsilon>0$. ($1+\epsilon$)-stretch labeling schemes with polylogarithmic label size have previously been established for doubling dimension graphs by Talwar (STOC 2004). In addition, we present matching upper and lower bounds for distance labeling for caterpillars, showing that labels must have size $2\log n - \Theta(\log\log n)$. For simple paths with $k$ nodes and edge weights in $[1,n]$, we show that labels must have size $\frac{k-1}{k}\log n+\Theta(\log k)$

Near-optimal labeling schemes for nearest common ancestors

We consider NCA labeling schemes: given a rooted tree $T$, label the nodes of $T$ with binary strings such that, given the labels of any two nodes, one can determine, by looking only at the labels, the label of their nearest common ancestor. For trees with $n$ nodes we present upper and lower bounds establishing that labels of size $(2\pm \epsilon)\log n$, $\epsilon<1$ are both sufficient and necessary. (All logarithms in this paper are in base 2.) Alstrup, Bille, and Rauhe (SIDMA'05) showed that ancestor and NCA labeling schemes have labels of size $\log n +\Omega(\log \log n)$. Our lower bound increases this to $\log n + \Omega(\log n)$ for NCA labeling schemes. Since Fraigniaud and Korman (STOC'10) established that labels in ancestor labeling schemes have size $\log n +\Theta(\log \log n)$, our new lower bound separates ancestor and NCA labeling schemes. Our upper bound improves the $10 \log n$ upper bound by Alstrup, Gavoille, Kaplan and Rauhe (TOCS'04), and our theoretical result even outperforms some recent experimental studies by Fischer (ESA'09) where variants of the same NCA labeling scheme are shown to all have labels of size approximately $8 \log n$