Comparing Two Counting Methods for Estimating the Probabilities of Strings

Ayaka Takamoto; Mitsuo Yoshida; Kyoji Umemura

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2211.04024

Comparing Two Counting Methods for Estimating the Probabilities of Strings

Ayaka Takamoto·Mitsuo Yoshida·Kyoji Umemura

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

There are two methods for counting the number of occurrences of a string in another large string. One is to count the number of places where the string is found. The other is to determine how many pieces of string can be extracted without overlapping. The difference between the two becomes apparent when the string is part of a periodic pattern. This research reports that the difference is significant in estimating the occurrence probability of a pattern. In this study, the strings used in the experiments are approximated from time-series data. The task involves classifying strings by estimating the probability or computing the information quantity. First, the frequencies of all substrings of a string are computed. Each counting method may sometimes produce different frequencies for an identical string. Second, the probability of the most probable segmentation is selected. The probability of the string is the product of all probabilities of substrings in the selected segmentation. The classification results demonstrate that the difference in counting methods is statistically significant, and that the method without overlapping is better.

Explore related subjects

cs.DS

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Ayaka Takamoto, Mitsuo Yoshida, Kyoji Umemura. 2022-11-08. Comparing Two Counting Methods for Estimating the Probabilities of Strings. https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.04024

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Quasi-Monte Carlo Beyond Hardy-Krause II: $(1 + \varepsilon)n$ Samples Suffice

Numerical integration studies how well one can estimate the integral of a function $f$ over $[0,1)^d$ using $n$ sample points. The two classical methods, Monte Carlo (MC) and quasi-Monte Carlo (QMC), have complementary strengths and weaknesses, and a fundamental question is to design an approach that combines the benefits of both. Recently, building on the transference principle in discrepancy theory, Bansal and Jiang~\cite{BJ25a} gave a randomized QMC method that bridges MC and QMC guarantees using only i.i.d.\ samples. Their method also goes beyond the classical Koksma--Hlawka inequality: it achieves integration error $\widetilde{O}_d(\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)/n)$, where the smoothed-out variation $\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)$ can be substantially smaller than the Hardy--Krause variation that governs the classical bound. However, their algorithm requires $n^2$ i.i.d.\ samples as input, and this quadratic blowup is inherent to any method based on the transference principle. In this work, we bypass the quadratic blowup: for any constant $\varepsilon > 0$, we show that $(1+\varepsilon)n$ i.i.d.\ samples suffice to both obtain the beyond-Hardy--Krause guarantee of~\cite{BJ25a}, resolving an open problem posed there, and to produce low-discrepancy point sequences. Our algorithms are variants of the online Haar-thinning method of Dwivedi, Feldheim, Gurel-Gurevich, and Ramdas~\cite{DFG+19}.

cs.DS↗

arXiv2026

A deterministic $(1+\varepsilon)^n$ approximation for the permanent of a nonnegative matrix

For every fixed $0<\varepsilon\le1$, we give a deterministic strongly polynomial algorithm that, given a nonnegative matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}_{\ge0}^{n\times n}$, returns $Q$ satisfying $\operatorname{per} A\le Q\le(1+\varepsilon)^n\operatorname{per} A$.

cs.DS↗

arXiv2026

Single-Exponential Algorithms and a Polynomial Kernel for Strong Connectivity Augmentation

Strong Connectivity Augmentation (SCA) asks whether a directed acyclic graph can be made strongly connected by adding at most $k$ prescribed links whose total weight is within a given budget. Klinkby, Misra, and Saurabh (SODA 2021) gave an $O^*(2^{O(k\log k)})$-time algorithm and asked whether the problem admits a single-exponential parameterized algorithm and a polynomial kernel. We answer both questions affirmatively: SCA can be solved in $O^*(9^k)$ time and admits a polynomial kernel with $O(k^4)$ vertices and $O(k^{16})$ bits. For unweighted SCA, we obtain $O^*(4^k)$ time and a kernel with $O(k^3)$ vertices. Our algorithms are based on a particularly simple reduction to Strongly Connected Spanning Subgraph with two edge costs.

cs.DS↗