Loading…
A note on block-and-bridge preserving maximum common subgraph algorithms for outerplanar graphs
Schietgat, Ramon and Bruynooghe [Schietgal et al., AMAI, 2013] proposed a polynomial-time algorithm for computing a maximum common subgraph under the block-and-bridge preserving subgraph isomorphism (BBP-MCS) for outerplanar graphs. We show that the article contains the following errors: The running...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of graph algorithms and applications 2018-09, Vol.22 (4), p.607-616 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Schietgat, Ramon and Bruynooghe [Schietgal et al., AMAI, 2013] proposed a polynomial-time
algorithm for computing a maximum common subgraph under the block-and-bridge
preserving subgraph isomorphism (BBP-MCS) for outerplanar graphs.
We show that the article contains the following errors:
The running time of the presented approach is claimed to be
$\mathcal{O}(n^{2.5})$ for two graphs of order $n$. We show
that the algorithm of the authors allows no better bound than $\mathcal{O}(n^4)$
when using state-of-the-art general purpose methods to solve the matching
instances arising as subproblems.
This is even true for the special case, where both input graphs are trees.
The article suggests that the dissimilarity measure derived from BBP-MCS
is a metric. We show that the triangle inequality is not always satisfied and,
hence, it is not a metric.
Therefore, the dissimilarity measure should not be used in combination with
techniques that rely on or exploit the triangle inequality in any way.
Where possible, we give hints on techniques that are suitable to improve the
algorithm. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1526-1719 1526-1719 |
DOI: | 10.7155/jgaa.00480 |