Library

X
feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    The longest common subsequence problem revisited (1987)
    Springer
    Algorithmica 2 (1987), S. 315-336 
    Details
    ISSN: 1432-0541
    Keywords: Design and analysis of algorithms ; Longest common subsequence ; Dictionary ; Finger-tree ; Characteristic tree ; Dynamic programming ; Efficient merging of linear lists
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Computer Science , Mathematics
    Notes: Abstract This paper re-examines, in a unified framework, two classic approaches to the problem of finding a longest common subsequence (LCS) of two strings, and proposes faster implementations for both. Letl be the length of an LCS between two strings of lengthm andn ≥m, respectively, and let s be the alphabet size. The first revised strategy follows the paradigm of a previousO(ln) time algorithm by Hirschberg. The new version can be implemented in timeO(lm · min logs, logm, log(2n/m)), which is profitable when the input strings differ considerably in size (a looser bound for both versions isO(mn)). The second strategy improves on the Hunt-Szymanski algorithm. This latter takes timeO((r +n) logn), wherer≤mn is the total number of matches between the two input strings. Such a performance is quite good (O(n logn)) whenr∼n, but it degrades to Θ(mn logn) in the worst case. On the other hand the variation presented here is never worse than linear-time in the productmn. The exact time bound derived for this second algorithm isO(m logn +d log(2mn/d)), whered ≤r is the number ofdominant matches (elsewhere referred to asminimal candidates) between the two strings. Both algorithms require anO(n logs) preprocessing that is nearly standard for the LCS problem, and they make use of simple and handy auxiliary data structures.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01840365
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    Paper (German National Licenses)
    Fulltext
  • 2
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Postoperative analgesia in herniorrhaphy with local anesthesia and monitored anesthesia care (1998)
    Springer
    Hernia 2 (1998), S. 103-106 
    Details
    ISSN: 1248-9204
    Keywords: Postherniorrhaphy pain ; Local anesthesia ; Monitored anesthesia care ; Metamizol
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: Summary In this study the authors evaluated the grade of acceptance and the operating conditions of unilateral primary herniorrhaphy under local anesthesia and monitored anesthesia care (MAC). The amount of pain in the immediate postoperative period was assessed and the efficacy of treatment using a popular non-opiate analgesic, magnesic metamizol, by the oral route was studied. In a period of six months 63 consecutive patients were operated on by the same surgeon using the same technique of hernia repair (Shouldice technique) with local infiltration anesthesia supplemented by MAC in the form of conscious sedation. A mixture of 300 mg of plain mepivacaine and 50 mg of plain bupivacaine was used for infiltration. A standard dose of fentanyl 0.10 mg and midazolam 2 mg was used for conscious sedation. Propofol in continuous infusion was also employed. The average dose of propofol varied from 1–3 mg/kg/h. Conscious level was assessed using a five-point sedation score. A level-3 end point was persued (closed eyes, but answer verbal orders). Pain intensity in the postoperative period was measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the verbal pain scale (VPS), based on the McGill pain questionnaire. The operating conditions were excellent in all cases except in three patients. In no case conversion to general anesthesia was necessary. In the postoperative period, 5 patients (8%) never felt pain and 58 (92%) felt pain on the average 4 hours 36 minutes after the local infiltration (VAS=2.5; VPS=1.45). Of the 58 patients 49 took the first dose of oral analgesic 6 hours 40 minutes after infiltration (VAS=4; VPS=1.97). All patients were satisfied with the anesthetic-surgical technique and were ready to repeat the experience. However, when the patients took the second dose of oral analgesic 28% of them had moderate pain and 9% severe pain. Our conclusions are that local infiltration with MAC is a valid and satisfying experience for both the patient and the surgeon. Nevertheless, further attempts should be made to better the postoperative pain relief when the oral route is elected.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01250022
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    Paper (German National Licenses)
    Fulltext
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...