Longest palindromic subsequence
Not to be confused with Longest palindromic substring.
The longest palindromic subsequence problem is the problem of finding the longest subsequence of a string (a subsequence is obtained by deleting some of the characters from a string without reordering the remaining characters) which is also a palindrome. In general, the longest palindromic subsequence is not unique. For example, the string alfalfa has two palindromic subsequences of length 5: alala and afafa. However, it does not have any palindromic subsequences longer than five characters. Therefore alala and afafa are both considred longest palindromic subsequences of alfalfa.
Contents
Precise statement
Three variations of this problem may be distinguished:
- Find the maximum possible length for a palindromic subsequence.
- Find some palindromic subsequence of maximal length.
- Find all longest palindromic subsequences.
Theorem: Returning all longest palindromic subsequences cannot be accomplished in worst-case polynomial time.
Proof: Consider a string made up of ones, followed by zeroes, and finally ones. (Assume is a multiple of 4, although it does not really matter.) Any palindromic substring either does not contain any zeroes, in which case its length is only up to , or it contains at least one zero. If it contains at least one zero, it must be of the form , but and must be equal. (This is because the middle of the palindrome must lie somewhere within the zeroes, otherwise there would be no zeroes on one side of it and at least one zero on the other side; but as long as the middle lies within the zeroes, there must be an equal number of ones on each side.) But can only be up to , and likewise with , so again the palindrome cannot be longer than characters. However, there are palindromic substrings of length ; we can either take all the ones, or we can take all zeroes, all terminal ones, and out of the initial ones. Thus the output size is not polynomial in , and then neither can the algorithm be in the worst case.
However, this does not rule out the existence of a polynomial-time algorithm for the first two variations on the problem. We now present such an algorithm.
Theoretical background
(Note: these Lemmas are "obvious" and their proofs will probably not help you intuitively understand how the algorithm works, so skip them if they are too heavy in mathematical notation for you.)
Lemma 1: Any palindromic subsequence of a string is a common subsequence of and its reverse .
Proof: Since is a subsequence of , its reverse is a subsequence of But since is a palindrome, so is a subsequence of , and hence a common subsequence.
Lemma 2: If there exists a common subsequence of length of and its reverse , then there exists a palindromic subsequence of of length greater than or equal to which is a supersequence of .
Proof: Let denote the subsequence in and denote the subsequence in . Let denote a supersequence of . Walk through the string from left to right. that is, consider as goes from 0 to . Let denote , so that at all times. For each value of :
- If is in then is in and is in .
- If is not in but is in , then, again, is in and is in .
- Otherwise, is not in and is not in .
After this has completed, is clearly a supersequence of and a subsequence of , and likewise is a supersequence of and a subsequence of .
Furthermore, and are reverses of each other, because whenever a character is added to the end of , the identical character is added to the beginning of , and vice versa.
Now consider the th character in . This is where is the th smallest index for which either is in or is in . This means that is the th largest index for which either is in or is in , since and are reverses of each other. Therefore, is the th character in (characters near the beginning of originate from near the beginning of or the end of ). But the th character in is the st character in , because and are reverses of each other. Therefore is palindromic.
Theorem: Any longest common subsequence of and its reverse is a longest palindromic subsequence of .
Proof: Suppose is not palindromic. By Lemma 2, we know we can obtain a palindrome that is a supersequence of and a subsequence of . This cannot be itself since is not palindromic. So must be longer than . By Lemma 1, is a common subsequence of and . However, as is longer than , this contradicts having been a longest common subsequence of and .
Likewise, suppose is a longest common subsequence of and and palindromic but it is not a longest palindromic subsequence of . Then there again exists a longer palindromic subsequence of , which gives a longer common subsequence of and , a contradiction.
Algorithm
A corollary of the Theorem is that a longest palindromic subsequence of can be found in time simply by finding the longest common subsequence of and its reverse.
Note that there exist more efficient algorithms for finding longest common subsequences, which also give more efficient means of computing longest palindromic subsequences.
Shortest palindromic supersequence
It can also be shown that the shortest palindromic supersequence of a string can be found by taking the shortest common supersequence of and its reverse. The proof is left as an exercise to the reader.
External links
- IOI '00 - Palindrome
- SPOJ:
- Palindrome 2000 (a duplicate of the problem above)
- Aibohphobia