Comparison of heuristic approaches to the generalized tree alignment problem

Cladistics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 452-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Ford ◽  
Ward C. Wheeler
1997 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 415-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
BENNO SCHWIKOWSKI ◽  
MARTIN VINGRON

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Quadrini ◽  
Luca Tesei ◽  
Emanuela Merelli ◽  

The methods proposed in the literature for RNA comparison focus mainly on pseudoknot free structures. The comparison of pseudoknotted structures is still a challenge. In this work, we propose a new algebraic representation of RNA secondary structures based on relations among hairpins in terms of nesting, crossing, and concatenation. Such algebraic representation is obtained from a defined multiple context-free grammar, which maps any kind of RNA secondary structures into extended trees, i.e., ordered trees where internal nodes are labeled with algebraic operators and leaves are labeled with loops. These extended trees permit the definition of the RNA secondary structure comparison as a tree alignment problem.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Quadrini ◽  
Luca Tesei ◽  
Emanuela Merelli ◽  

The methods proposed in the literature for RNA comparison focus mainly on pseudoknot free structures. The comparison of pseudoknotted structures is still a challenge. In this work, we propose a new algebraic representation of RNA secondary structures based on relations among hairpins in terms of nesting, crossing, and concatenation. Such algebraic representation is obtained from a defined multiple context-free grammar, which maps any kind of RNA secondary structures into extended trees, i.e., ordered trees where internal nodes are labeled with algebraic operators and leaves are labeled with loops. These extended trees permit the definition of the RNA secondary structure comparison as a tree alignment problem.


2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrés Varón ◽  
Ward C Wheeler

Author(s):  
Phanish Puranam

Division of labor involves task division and task allocation. An extremely important consequence of task division and allocation is the creation of interdependence between agents. In fact, division of labor can be seen as a process that converts interdependence between tasks into interdependence between agents. While there are many ways in which the task structure can be chunked and divided among agents, two important heuristic approaches involve division of labor by activity vs. object. I show that a choice between these two forms of division of labor only arises when the task structure is non-decomposable, but the product itself is decomposable. When the choice arises, a key criterion for selection between activity vs. object-based division of labor is the gain from specialization relative to the gain from customization.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document