Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 183 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 46 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 30 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 28 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 82 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 213 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 457 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Counting 4-Patterns in Permutations Is Equivalent to Counting 4-Cycles in Graphs (2010.00348v1)

Published 1 Oct 2020 in cs.DS

Abstract: Permutation $\sigma$ appears in permutation $\pi$ if there exists a subsequence of $\pi$ that is order-isomorphic to $\sigma$. The natural question is to check if $\sigma$ appears in $\pi$, and if so count the number of occurrences. We know that for any fixed length~k, we can check if a given pattern of length k appears in a permutation of length n in time linear in n, but being able to count all such occurrences in $f(k)\cdot n{o(k/\log k)}$ time would refute the exponential time hypothesis (ETH). This motivates a systematic study of the complexity of counting occurrences for different patterns of fixed small length k. We investigate this question for k=4. Very recently, Even-Zohar and Leng [arXiv 2019] identified two types of 4-patterns. For the first type they designed an $~O(n)$ time algorithm, while for the second they were able to provide an $~O(n{1.5})$ time algorithm. This brings up the question whether the permutations of the second type are inherently harder than the first type. We establish a connection between counting 4-patterns of the second type and counting 4-cycles in a sparse undirected graph. By designing two-way reductions we show that the complexities of both problems are the same, up to polylogarithmic factors. This allows us to provide a reasonable argument for why there is a difference in the complexities for counting 4-patterns of the two types. In particular, even for the simpler problem of detecting a 4-cycle in a graph on m edges, the best known algorithm works in $O(m{4/3})$ time. Our reductions imply that an $O(n{4/3-\varepsilon})$ time algorithm for counting occurrences would imply an exciting breakthrough for counting (and hence also detecting) 4-cycles. In the other direction, by plugging in the fastest known algorithm for counting 4-cycles, we obtain an algorithm for counting occurrences of any 4-pattern in $O(n{1.48})$ time.

Citations (3)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.