3 research outputs found

    Tight Bound for the Number of Distinct Palindromes in a Tree

    Full text link
    For an undirected tree with nn edges labelled by single letters, we consider its substrings, which are labels of the simple paths between pairs of nodes. We prove that there are O(n1.5)O(n^{1.5}) different palindromic substrings. This solves an open problem of Brlek, Lafreni\`ere, and Proven\c{c}al (DLT 2015), who gave a matching lower-bound construction. Hence, we settle the tight bound of Θ(n1.5)\Theta(n^{1.5}) for the maximum palindromic complexity of trees. For standard strings, i.e., for paths, the palindromic complexity is n+1n+1. We also propose O(n1.5logn)O(n^{1.5} \log{n})-time algorithm for reporting all distinct palindromes in an undirected tree with nn edges

    Palindromes in starlike trees

    Full text link
    In this note, we obtain an upper bound on the maximum number of distinct non-empty palindromes in starlike trees. This bound implies, in particular, that there are at most 4n4n distinct non-empty palindromes in a starlike tree with three branches each of length nn. For such starlike trees labelled with a binary alphabet, we sharpen the upper bound to 4n14n-1 and conjecture that the actual maximum is 4n24n-2. It is intriguing that this simple conjecture seems difficult to prove, in contrast to the straightforward proof of the bound.Comment: 5 page

    Distinct Squares in Circular Words

    Full text link
    A circular word, or a necklace, is an equivalence class under conjugation of a word. A fundamental question concerning regularities in standard words is bounding the number of distinct squares in a word of length nn. The famous conjecture attributed to Fraenkel and Simpson is that there are at most nn such distinct squares, yet the best known upper bound is 1.84n1.84n by Deza et al. [Discr. Appl. Math. 180, 52-69 (2015)]. We consider a natural generalization of this question to circular words: how many distinct squares can there be in all cyclic rotations of a word of length nn? We prove an upper bound of 3.14n3.14n. This is complemented with an infinite family of words implying a lower bound of 1.25n1.25n.Comment: to appear in SPIRE 201
    corecore