Ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomials

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There are several common ways to encode a tree as a matrix, such as the adjacency matrix, the Laplacian matrix (that is, the infinitesimal generator of the natural random walk), and the matrix of pairwise distances between leaves. Su...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Matsen Frederick A, Evans Steven N
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2012-05-01
Series:Algorithms for Molecular Biology
Online Access:http://www.almob.org/content/7/1/14
id doaj-f120d7681402434782ee6712549e7d2d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f120d7681402434782ee6712549e7d2d2020-11-25T01:41:36ZengBMCAlgorithms for Molecular Biology1748-71882012-05-01711410.1186/1748-7188-7-14Ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomialsMatsen Frederick AEvans Steven N<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There are several common ways to encode a tree as a matrix, such as the adjacency matrix, the Laplacian matrix (that is, the infinitesimal generator of the natural random walk), and the matrix of pairwise distances between leaves. Such representations involve a specific labeling of the vertices or at least the leaves, and so it is natural to attempt to identify trees by some feature of the associated matrices that is invariant under relabeling. An obvious candidate is the spectrum of eigenvalues (or, equivalently, the characteristic polynomial).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We show for any of these choices of matrix that the fraction of binary trees with a unique spectrum goes to zero as the number of leaves goes to infinity. We investigate the rate of convergence of the above fraction to zero using numerical methods. For the adjacency and Laplacian matrices, we show that the <it>a priori </it>more informative immanantal polynomials have no greater power to distinguish between trees.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results show that a generic large binary tree is highly unlikely to be identified uniquely by common spectral invariants.</p> http://www.almob.org/content/7/1/14
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Matsen Frederick A
Evans Steven N
spellingShingle Matsen Frederick A
Evans Steven N
Ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomials
Algorithms for Molecular Biology
author_facet Matsen Frederick A
Evans Steven N
author_sort Matsen Frederick A
title Ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomials
title_short Ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomials
title_full Ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomials
title_fullStr Ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomials
title_full_unstemmed Ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomials
title_sort ubiquity of synonymity: almost all large binary trees are not uniquely identified by their spectra or their immanantal polynomials
publisher BMC
series Algorithms for Molecular Biology
issn 1748-7188
publishDate 2012-05-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There are several common ways to encode a tree as a matrix, such as the adjacency matrix, the Laplacian matrix (that is, the infinitesimal generator of the natural random walk), and the matrix of pairwise distances between leaves. Such representations involve a specific labeling of the vertices or at least the leaves, and so it is natural to attempt to identify trees by some feature of the associated matrices that is invariant under relabeling. An obvious candidate is the spectrum of eigenvalues (or, equivalently, the characteristic polynomial).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We show for any of these choices of matrix that the fraction of binary trees with a unique spectrum goes to zero as the number of leaves goes to infinity. We investigate the rate of convergence of the above fraction to zero using numerical methods. For the adjacency and Laplacian matrices, we show that the <it>a priori </it>more informative immanantal polynomials have no greater power to distinguish between trees.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results show that a generic large binary tree is highly unlikely to be identified uniquely by common spectral invariants.</p>
url http://www.almob.org/content/7/1/14
work_keys_str_mv AT matsenfredericka ubiquityofsynonymityalmostalllargebinarytreesarenotuniquelyidentifiedbytheirspectraortheirimmanantalpolynomials
AT evansstevenn ubiquityofsynonymityalmostalllargebinarytreesarenotuniquelyidentifiedbytheirspectraortheirimmanantalpolynomials
_version_ 1725040713409757184