Mathias Weller

Leo van Iersel, Mark Jones, Mathias Weller

TREE CONTAINMENT is a central decision problem in mathematical phylogenetics, asking whether a given rooted phylogenetic tree is embeddable in ("displayed by") a given rooted phylogenetic network. While the problem is NP-complete for general networks, many algorithmic advances have relied on structural parameters that capture how "tree-like" a network is. In this paper we investigate TREE CONTAINMENT under the structural parameter scanwidth, a directed width measure generalizing popular parameters measuring tree-likeness of phylogenetic networks. We first present a parameterized algorithm that solves the problem in $O(4^{k + k\log{k}} n + nm^2)$ time, where $n$ and $m$ are the numbers of nodes and arcs in the network and $k$ is the width of a given tree-extension. Complementing this upper bound, we prove a matching lower bound under the Exponential-Time Hypothesis (ETH), showing that there is no algorithm for TREE CONTAINMENT that runs in $2^{o(c\log{c})} n^{O(1)}$ time, even on binary inputs, where $c$ is the directed cutwidth of the input network, which upper-bounds the scanwidth $k$.

Sebastian Bruchhold, Mathias Weller

Phylogenetic networks allow modeling reticulate evolution, capturing events such as hybridization and horizontal gene transfer. A fundamental computational problem in this context is the Tree Containment problem, which asks whether a given phylogenetic network is compatible with a given phylogenetic tree. However, the classical statement of the problem is not robust to poorly supported branches in biological data, possibly leading to false negatives. In an effort to address this, a relaxed version that accounts for uncertainty, called Soft Tree Containment, has been introduced by Bentert, Malík, and Weller [SWAT'18]. We present an algorithm that solves Soft Tree Containment in $2^{O(Δ_T \cdot k \cdot \log(k))} \cdot n^{O(1)}$ time, where $k = \operatorname{sw}(Γ) + Δ_N$, with $Δ_T$ and $Δ_N$ denoting the maximum out-degrees in the tree and the network, respectively, and $\operatorname{sw}(Γ)$ denoting the "scanwidth" [Berry, Scornavacca, and Weller, SOFSEM'20] of a given tree extension of the network, while $n$ is the input size. Our approach leverages the fact that phylogenetic networks encountered in practice often exhibit low scanwidth, making the problem more tractable.

Leo van Iersel, Mark Jones, Jannik Schestag et al.

We investigate parameterized algorithms for computing the average-tree phylogenetic diversity (APD) in rooted phylogenetic networks, studying the problem under different structural parameters that capture the deviation of a network from a tree. Our primary parameter is the scanwidth, a measure of the tree-likeness of a given directed acyclic graph. We show that a subset of taxa with maximum APD can be found in polynomial time in phylogenetic networks of scanwidth at most 2, but becomes NP-hard in networks of scanwidth 3. Further, we design an algorithm that computes the APD of a given set of taxa in O(2^sw n) time, where sw denotes the scanwidth and n the number of taxa in the input network. Finally, we give a linear-time algorithm for computing the APD of a given set of taxa if the network induced by these taxa is reticulation-visible. We generalize this algorithm to still run in polynomial time if each biconnected component of the induced network has only constantly many invisible reticulations.

Michael R. Fellows, Lars Jaffke, Aliz Izabella Király et al.

We are pleased to dedicate this survey on kernelization of the Vertex Cover problem, to Professor Juraj Hromkovič on the occasion of his 60th birthday. The Vertex Cover problem is often referred to as the Drosophila of parameterized complexity. It enjoys a long history. New and worthy perspectives will always be demonstrated first with concrete results here. This survey discusses several research directions in Vertex Cover kernelization. The Barrier Degree of Vertex Cover kernelization is discussed. We have reduction rules that kernelize vertices of small degree, including in this paper new results that reduce graphs almost to minimum degree five. Can this process go on forever? What is the minimum vertex-degree barrier for polynomial-time kernelization? Assuming the Exponential-Time Hypothesis, there is a minimum degree barrier. The idea of automated kernelization is discussed. We here report the first experimental results of an AI-guided branching algorithm for Vertex Cover whose logic seems amenable for application in finding reduction rules to kernelize small-degree vertices. The survey highlights a central open problem in parameterized complexity. Happy Birthday, Juraj!