8
$\begingroup$

What is known about the following problem?

Reconstruct a string $\sigma$ of known length $n$ over a known alphabet $\Sigma$ from a collection of uniformly and independently chosen $k$-long subsequences of $\sigma$ where $k$ is fixed between $0$ and $n$.

Recall that a $k$-long subsequence of $\sigma=\langle \sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_n\rangle$ is a sequence $\langle \sigma_{\varphi(1)},\dots,\sigma_{\varphi(k)}\rangle$ where $\varphi$ is an increasing function from $\{1,\ldots,k\}$ to $\{1,\ldots,n\}$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Cross-posted from cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/27189 $\endgroup$ Oct 27, 2014 at 14:54
  • $\begingroup$ So if each string is encoded as a vector in a finite field, then given several projections (hence, linear measurements) you are seeking to reconstruct the original. Sounds like a finite field version of a generic inverse problem ; I wonder which of the standard statweb.stanford.edu/~candes/papers/OptimalRecovery.pdf "signal recovery from random projections" ideas extend.... $\endgroup$
    – Suvrit
    Oct 27, 2014 at 16:56
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Presumably you don't know which $\phi$ corresponds to a given subsequence, otherwise the problem is trivial (you'd just have to wait until you've seen all the characters of the string). I think that is the difference between this situation and the usual "signal recovery from random projections", where the projections are known. $\endgroup$ Oct 27, 2014 at 17:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RobertIsrael: In that case, this becomes more like a "blind deconvolution" problem :-) --- also, as a side note, in the usual signal recovery case, one wishes to recover the signal from a much smaller number of measurements / projections than the trivial "wait until I've seen all" version! $\endgroup$
    – Suvrit
    Oct 27, 2014 at 18:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Seems hard to reconstruct the string $a^x b a^y$, where $x,y \gg k$. Only a small fraction of samples will include the $b$, and you need enough of these to reliably estimate $x$ and $y$ based on the average position of $b$ in such samples. $\endgroup$
    – usul
    Oct 28, 2014 at 1:16

1 Answer 1

5
$\begingroup$

Given the string $\sigma$, for any word $x$ of length $k$ the probability $P_{n,k}(\sigma, x)$ that a randomly chosen $k$-long subsequence matches $x$ can be computed, e.g. using $$ P_{n,k}(\sigma,x) = \dfrac{k}{n} \delta_{\sigma_1, x_1} P_{n-1,k-1}(\sigma',x') + \left(1 - \dfrac{k}{n}\right) P_{n-1,k}(\sigma',x)$$ where $\sigma'$ and $x'$ are $\sigma$ and $x$ respectively with the first symbol removed. If the distributions for different $\sigma$ are different, in principle we can take enough samples to classify $\sigma$ with high probability. But if two $\sigma$'s have the same distribution, we can't distinguish them.

For example, take $n=4$, $k=2$ and the alphabet $\{0,1\}$, Here are all the $P_{4,2}$:

$$ \left[ \begin {array}{ccccc} &[0,0]&[0,1]&[1,0]&[1,1] \\ [0,0,0,0]&1&0&0&0\\ [0,0,0,1]&1 /2&1/2&0&0\\ [0,0,1,0]&1/2&1/3&1/6&0 \\ [0,0,1,1]&1/6&2/3&0&1/6\\ [0,1,0 ,0]&1/2&1/6&1/3&0\\ [0,1,0,1]&1/6&1/2&1/6&1/6 \\ [0,1,1,0]&1/6&1/3&1/3&1/6\\ [0, 1,1,1]&0&1/2&0&1/2\\ [1,0,0,0]&1/2&0&1/2&0 \\ [1,0,0,1]&1/6&1/3&1/3&1/6\\ [1,0 ,1,0]&1/6&1/6&1/2&1/6\\ [1,0,1,1]&0&1/3&1/6&1/2 \\ [1,1,0,0]&1/6&0&2/3&1/6\\ [1,1,0 ,1]&0&1/6&1/3&1/2\\ [1,1,1,0]&0&0&1/2&1/2 \\ [1,1,1,1]&0&0&0&1\end {array} \right] $$

Note that $\sigma = [0,1,1,0]$ and $\sigma = [ 1,0,0,1]$ both have the same distribution. So these two cannot be distinguished by their distributions of $2$-long subsequences.

EDIT: For another example, for $n=7$ and $k=3$, $\sigma = [1, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0]$ and $\sigma = [0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1]$ can't be distinguished by their distributions of $3$-long subsequences. But for $n=6$, all $\sigma \in \{0,1\}^6$ can be distinguished by their distributions of $3$-long subsequences.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Debruijn words would also provide examples that could not be distinguished. $\endgroup$ Oct 27, 2014 at 18:03
  • $\begingroup$ @TheMaskedAvenger De Bruijn sequences have to do with consecutive subsequences, which is not the case here. I see no reason why two De Bruijn sequences should have the same distribution of $k$-long non-consecutive subsequences. $\endgroup$ Oct 27, 2014 at 19:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.