A counterexample to linear relationship between largest common subtrees and smallest common supertrees
Fuente:
arXiv
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866909789976526848 |
|---|---|
| author | Brzeski, Maciej |
| author_facet | Brzeski, Maciej |
| contents | We present a counter-example to the statement that there is a linear reduction in both directionsbetween the largest common subtree and the smallest common supertrees. Moreover, we show that in general, even having of one of them, it is necessery to calculate the other from the linear number of nodes. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_12360 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | A counterexample to linear relationship between largest common subtrees and smallest common supertrees Brzeski, Maciej Combinatorics We present a counter-example to the statement that there is a linear reduction in both directionsbetween the largest common subtree and the smallest common supertrees. Moreover, we show that in general, even having of one of them, it is necessery to calculate the other from the linear number of nodes. |
| title | A counterexample to linear relationship between largest common subtrees and smallest common supertrees |
| topic | Combinatorics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.12360 |