On the Maximum Agreement Subtree Conjecture for Balanced TreesMaximum Agreement • May 18th, 2020
2h1 · 2h2−h1 = 2h2 distinct labels. Moreover, under this assignment of labels, L(Si) ∩ L(Tj) = Lr for some r ∈ {1, 2, . . . , 22h1 } (namely, the one that is placed in row i and column j). In particular, for all i and j, the pendant subtrees Si and Tj have exactly |Lr| = 2h2−h1 common labels.
Maximum Agreement and Compatible SupertreesMaximum Agreement • April 12th, 2023
We then extend these problems to the case of supertrees where input trees can have non-identical leaf sets. For the obtained problems, SMAST and SMCT, we give an time algorithm for the special case of two input trees ( is the time bound for solving MAST, resp. MCT, on two -leaf trees). Finally, we show that SMAST and SMCT parametrized in are -hard and cannot be approximated in polynomial time within a constant factor unless , even when the input trees are rooted triples.
AGREEMENT BETWEENMaximum Agreement • May 30th, 2017
The parties to this Agreement are the SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, a public corporation (District) and ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO, a California non profit corporation (Service Provider). The parties agree to the following:
FORM OF AGREEMENT FOR THE MARKETING OF ENERGYMaximum Agreement • August 31st, 2020 • Hygo Energy Transition Ltd. • Natural gas distribution
On one side, GPE SERGIPE - EMPREENDIMENTOS SPE LTDA, a company authorized for the generation of electric energy, with registered office at AVENIDA RIO BRANCO, 186, SALA 506 EDIF OVIEDO TEIXEIRA, CENTRO, ARACAJU-SE, taxpayer identification number CNPJ/MF 20.095.481/0001-73, hereinafter referred to as SELLER, and, on the other, [________], a company holder of license for the provision of public services of distribution of electric energy, with registered office at [_________], hereinafter referred to as BUYER, collectively referred to PARTIES, and separately PARTY, herein represented by their undersigned legal representatives, pursuant to the terms of their constitutional documents;
Seth SullivantMaximum Agreement • March 24th, 2018
The Maximum Agreement of Two Nested Phylogenetic NetworksMaximum Agreement • November 9th, 2004
Abstract. Given a set of phylogenetic networks, the maximum agree- ment phylogenetic subnetwork problem (MASN) asks for a subnetwork contained in every Ni with as many leaves as possible. MASN can be used to identify shared branching structure among phylogenetic networks or to measure their similarity. In this paper, we prove that the general case of MASN is NP-hard already for two phylogenetic networks, but that the problem can be solved efficiently if the two given phylogenetic networks exhibit a nested structure. We first show that the total number of nodes V (N ) in any nested phylogenetic network N with n leaves and nesting depth d is O(n(d + 1)). We then describe an algorithm for testing if a given phylogenetic network is nested, and if so, determin- ing its nesting depth in O( V (N ) (d + 1)) time. Next, we present a polynomial-time algorithm for MASN for two nested phylogenetic net- works N1, N2. Its running time is O( V (N1) V (N2) (d1 + 1) (d2 + 1)), where d1 and d2 denote the n
