arxiv: v1 [cs.cc] 8 Sep 2014

Transcription

1 A Parameterized Study of Maximum Generaized Pattern Matching Probems arxiv: v1 [cs.cc] 8 Sep 2014 Sebastian Ordyniak Aexandru Popa Facuty of Informatics, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Repubic, sordyniak@gmai.com, popa@fi.muni.cz June 20, 2018 Abstract The generaized function matching (GFM) probem has been intensivey studied starting with [Ehrenfeucht and Rozenberg, 1979]. Given a pattern p and a text t, the goa is to find a mapping from the etters of p to non-empty substrings of t, such that appying the mapping to p resuts in t. Very recenty, the probem has been investigated within the framework of parameterized compexity [Fernau, Schmid, and Vianger, 2013]. In this paper we study the parameterized compexity of the optimization variant of GFM (caed Max-GFM), which has been introduced in [Amir and Nor, 2007]. Here, one is aowed to repace some of the pattern etters with some specia symbos?, termed widcards or don t cares, which canbe mappedtoanarbitrary substringofthetext. The goa is tominimize thenumberofwidcards used. We give a compete cassification of the parameterized compexity of Max-GFM and its variants under a wide range of parameterizations, such as, the number of occurrences of a etter in the text, the size of the text aphabet, the number of occurrences of a etter in the pattern, the size of the pattern aphabet, the maximum ength of a string matched to any pattern etter, the number of widcards and the maximum size of a string that a widcard can be mapped to. 1 Introduction In the generaized function matching probem one is given a text t and a pattern p and the goa is to decide whether there is a match between p and t, where a singe etter of the pattern is aowed to match mutipe etters of the text (we say that p GF-matches t). For exampe, if the text is t = xyyx and the pattern is p = aba, then a generaized function match (on short, GF-match) is a x,b yy, but if t = xyyz and p = aba, then there is no GF-match. If, moreover, the matching is required to be injective, then we term the probem generaized parameterzied matching (GPM). In [1], Amir and Nor describe appications of GFM in various areas such as software engineering, image searching, DNA anaysis, poetry and music anaysis, or author vaidation. GFM is aso reated to areas such as (un-)avoidabe patterns [12], word equations [13] and the ambiguity of morphisms [11]. GFM has a ong history starting from Ehrenfeucht and Rozenberg [7] show that GFM is NP-compete. Independenty, Anguin [2, 3] studies a more genera variant of GFM where the pattern may contain aso etters of the text aphabet. Anguin s paper received a ot of attention, especiay in the earning theory community [16,17,19] (see [14] for a survey) but aso in many other areas. Recenty, a systematic study of the cassica compexity of a number of variants of GFM and GPM under various restrictions has been carried out [8, 18]. It was shown that GFM and GPM remain Research funded by Empoyment of Newy Graduated Doctors of Science for Scientific Exceence (CZ.1.07/2.3.00/ ). 1

2 NP-compete for many natura restrictions. Moreover, the study of GFM and its variants within the framework of parameterized compexity has recenty been initiated [9]. In this paper we study the parameterized compexity of the optimization variant of GFM (caed Max-GFM) and its variants, where one is aowed to repace some of the pattern etters with some specia symbos?, termed widcards or don t cares, which can be mapped to an arbitrary substring of the text. The goa is to minimize the number of widcards used. The probem was first introduced to the pattern matching community by Amir and Nor [1]. They show that if the pattern aphabet has constant size, then a poynomia agorithm can be found, but that the probem is NP-compete otherwise. Then, in [4], it is shown the NP-hardness of the GFM (without widcards) and the NP-hardness of the GFM when the function f is required to be an injection (named GPM). More specificay, GFM is NP-hard even if the text aphabet is binary and each etter of the pattern is aowed to map to at most two etters of the text [4]. In the same paper it is given a OPT approximation agorithm for the optimization variant of GFM where the goa is to search for a pattern p that GF-matches t and has the smaest Hamming distance to p. In [5] the optimization versionsof GFM and GPM are provedto be APX-hard. Our resuts Before we discuss our resuts, we give forma definitions of the probems. In the foowing et t be a text over an aphabet Σ t and et p = p 1...p m be a pattern over an aphabet Σ p. We say that p GF-matches t if there is a function f : Σ p Σ + t such that f(p 1 )...f(p m ) = t. To improve the presentation we wi sometimes abuse notation by writing f(p) instead of f(p 1 )...f(p m ). Let k be a natura number. We say that a pattern p k-gf-matches t if there is a text p over aphabet Σ p {? 1,...,? k } of Hamming distance at most k from p such that p GF-matches t. Probem 1 (Maximum Generaized Function Matching). Given a text t, a pattern p, and an integer k, decide whether p k-gf-matches t. The Max-GFM can be seen as the optimization variant of GFM in which we want to repace some of the pattern etters with specia widcard symbos, i.e., the symbos? 1,...,? k, which can be mapped to any non-empty substring of the text. We aso study the Max-GPM probem. The ony difference between Max-GPM and Max-GFM is that for Max-GPM the function f is required to be injective. The notions of GP-matching and k-gpmatching are defined in the natura way, e.g., we say a pattern p GP-matches a text t if p GF-matches t using an injective function. In this paper we study the parameterized compexity of the two probems using a wide range of parameters: maximum number of occurrences of a etter in the text #Σ t, maximum number of occurrences of a etter in the pattern #Σ p, size of the text aphabet Σ t, size of the pattern aphabet Σ p, the maximum ength of a substring of the text that a etter of the pattern aphabet can be mapped to (i.e., max i f(p i ) ), the number of widcard etters #?, and the maximum ength of a substring of the text that a widcard can be mapped to, denoted by max f(?). Our resuts are summarized in Tabe 1. We verified the competeness of our resuts using a simpe computer program. In particuar, the program checks for every of the 128 possibe combinations of parameters C that the tabe contains either: i) a superset of C under which Max-GFM/GPM is hard (andthus,max-gfm/gpmishardifparameterizedbyc); orii)asubsetofc forwhichmax-gfm/gpm is fpt (and then we have an fpt resut for the set of parameters C). Since some of our resuts do not hod for both Max-GFM and Max-GPM, we carried out two separate checks, one for Max-GFM and one for Max-GPM. The paper is organized as foows. In Section 2 we give preiminaries, in Section 3 we present our fixed-parameter agorithms and in Section 4 we show our hardness resuts. 2 Preiminaries We define the basic notions of Parameterized Compexity and refer to other sources [6,10] for an indepth treatment. A parameterized probem is a set of pairs I,k, the instances, where I is the main part and k the parameter. The parameter is usuay a non-negative integer. A parameterized probem 2

3 #Σ t Σ t #Σ p Σ p max i f(p i ) #? max f(?) Compexity par par FPT (Cor. 3) par par par FPT (Th. 1) par par FPT ony GPM (Cor. 1) par par par par FPT (Cor. 2) par par par par FPT (Th. 2) par par par par par W[1]-h (Th. 4) par par par par par W[1]-h (Th. 7) par par par par par W[1]-h (Th. 5) par par par par par W[1]- h ( [9, Th. 2.]) par par par par W[1]- h (Th. 6) par par par W[1]- h (Th. 3) par par par par par para-np-h ( [1, Cor. 1]), par par par para-np-h ony GFM [8] par par para-np-h ony GPM [8] Tabe 1: Parameterized Compexity of Max-GFM and Max-GPM. is fixed-parameter tractabe (fpt) if there exists an agorithm that soves any instance I,k of size n in time f(k)n c where f is an arbitrary computabe function and c is a constant independent of both n and k. FPT is the cass of a fixed-parameter tractabe decision probems. Because we focus on fixedparameter tractabiity of a probem we wi sometimes use the notation O to suppress exact poynomia dependencies, i.e., a probem with input size n and parameter k can be soved in time O (f(k)) if it can be soved in time O(f(k)n c ) for some constant c. Parameterized compexity offers a competeness theory, simiar to the theory of NP-competeness, that aows the accumuation of strong theoretica evidence that some parameterized probems are not fixed-parameter tractabe. This theory is based on a hierarchy of compexity casses FPT W[1] W[2] W[3] where a incusions are beieved to be strict. An fpt-reduction from a parameterized probem P to a parameterized probem Q is a mapping R from instances of P to instances of Q such that (i) I,k is a Yes-instance of P if and ony if I,k = R(I,k) is a Yes-instance of Q, (ii) there is a computabe function g such that k g(k), and (iii) there is a computabe function f and a constant c such that R can be computed in time O(f(k) n c ), where n denotes the size of I,k. For our hardness resuts we wi often reduce from the foowing probem, which is we-known to be W[1]-compete [15]. Muticoored Cique Instance: A k-partite graph G = V,E with a partition V 1,...,V k of V. Parameter: The integer k. Question: Are there nodes v 1,...,v k such that v i V i and {v i,v j } E for a i and j with 1 i < j k (i.e. the subgraph of G induced by {v 1,...,v k } is a cique of size k)? For our hardness proofs we wi often make the additiona assumptions that (1) V i = V j for every i and j with 1 i < j k and (2) E i,j = E r,s for every i, j, r, and s with 1 i < j k and 1 r < s k, where E i,j = {{u,v} E u V i and v V j } for every i and j as before. To see that Muticoored Cique remains W[1]-hard under these additiona restrictions we can reduce from Muticoored Cique to its more restricted version using a simpe padding construction as foows. Given an instance G, k of Muticoored Cique we construct an instance of its more restricted version by adding edges (whose endpoints are new vertices) between parts (i.e. V 1,...,V k ) that do not aready have the maximum number of edges between them and then adding isoated vertices to parts that do not aready have the maximum number of vertices. Even stronger evidence that a parameterized probem is not fixed-parameter tractabe can be obtained by showing that the probem remains NP-compete even if the parameter is a constant. The cass of these probems is caed para-np. 3

4 A square is a string consisting of two copies of the same (non-empty) string. We say that a string is square-free if it does not contain a square as a substring. 3 Fixed-parameter Tractabe Variants In this section we show our fixed-parameter tractabiity resuts for Max-GFM and Max-GPM. In particuar, we show that Max-GFM and Max-GPM are fixed-parameter tractabe parameterized by Σ t, Σ p, and max i f(p i ), and aso parameterized by #?, max f(?), Σ p, and max i f(p i ). We start by showing fixed-parameter tractabiity for the parameters Σ t, Σ p, and max i f(p i ). We need the foowing emma. Lemma 1. Given a pattern p = p 1...p m over an aphabet Σ p, a text t = t 1...t n over an aphabet Σ t, a natura number q, and a function f : Σ p Σ + t, then there is a poynomia time agorithm deciding whether p q-gf/gp-matches t using the function f. Proof. If we are asked whether p q-gp-matches t and f is not injective, then we obviousy provide a negative answer. Otherwise, we use a dynamic programming agorithm that is simiar in spirit to an agorithm in [4]. Let Σ p = {a 1,...a k }. For every 0 i j n, we define the function g(i,j) to be the Hamming GFM/GPM-simiarity (i.e., m minus the minimum number of widcards needed) between t 1 t 2...t j and p 1 p 2...p i. Then, we obtain the Hamming GFM/GPM-simiarity between p and t as g(m,n). Consequenty, if m g(m,n) > q, we return No, otherwise we return Yes. We now show how to recursivey compute g(i,j). If i = 0, we set g(i,j) = 0 and if i j, we set: g(i,j) = max 1 k j {g(i 1,j k)+i(t j k+1...t j,f(p i )} where I(s 1,s 2 ) is 1 if the strings s 1, and s 2 are the same, and 0 otherwise. We must first show that the dynamic programming procedure computes the right function and then that it runs in poynomia time. We can see immediatey that g(0,i) = 0 for a i because in this case the pattern is empty. The recursion step of g(i,j) has two cases: If t j f(pi) +1...t j = f(p i ), then it is possibe to map p i to f(p i ), and we can increase the number of mapped etters by one. Otherwise, we cannot increase the Hamming GFM/GPM-simiarity. However, we know that p i has to be set to a widcard and therefore we find the maximum of the previous resuts for different ength substrings that the widcard maps to. It is straightforward to check that g(i,j) can be computed in cubic time. Theorem 1. Max-GFM and Max-GPM parameterized by Σ t, Σ p, and max i f(p i ) are fixed-parameter tractabe. Proof. Let p, t, and q be an instance of Max-GFM or Max-GPM, respectivey. The pattern p q-gf/gpmatches t if and ony if there is a function f : Σ p Σ + t such that p q-gf/gp-matches t using f. Hence, to sove Max-GFM/Max-GPM, it is sufficient to appy the agorithm from Lemma 1 to every function f : Σ p Σ + t that coud possibe constitute to a q-gf/gp-matching from p to t. Because there are at most ( Σ t ) max i f(p i) Σp such functions f and the agorithm from Lemma 1 runs in poynomia time, the running time of this agorithm is O (( Σ t ) maxi f(pi) Σp ), and hence fixed-parameter tractabe in Σ t, Σ p, and max i f(p i ). Because in the case of Max-GPM it hods that if Σ t and max i f(p i ) is bounded then aso Σ p is bounded by Σ t max i f(p i), we obtain the foowing coroary. Coroary 1. Max-GPM parameterized by Σ t and max i f(p i ) is fixed-parameter tractabe. We continue by showing our second tractabiity resut for the parameters Σ p, max i f(p i ), #?, and max f(?). Theorem 2. Max-GFM and Max-GPM parameterized by Σ p, max i f(p i ), #?, max f(?), are fixedparameter tractabe. 4

5 Proof. Let p, t, and q be an instance of Max-GFM or Max-GPM, respectivey. Observe that if we coud go over a possibe functions f : Σ p Σ + t that coud possibe constitute to a q-gf/gp-matching from p to t, then we coud again appy Lemma 1 as we did in the proof of Theorem 1. Unfortunatey, because Σ t is not a parameter, the number of these functions cannot be bounded as easiy any more. However, as we wi show next it is sti possibe to bound the number of possibe functions soey in terms of the parameters. In particuar, we wi show that the number of possibe substrings of t that any etter of the pattern aphabet can be mapped to is bounded by a function of the parameters. Because aso Σ p is a parameter this immediatey impies a bound (ony in terms of the given parameters) on the tota number of these functions. Let c Σ p and consider any q-gf/gp-matching from p to t, i.e., a text p = p 1...p m of Hamming distance at most q to p and a function f : Σ p {? 1,...,? q } Σ + t such that f(p 1 )...f(p m) = t. Then either c does not occur in p or c occurs in p. In the first case we can assign to c any non-empty substring over the aphabet Σ t (in the case of Max-GPM one additionay has to ensure that the nonempty substrings over Σ t that one chooses for distinct etters in Σ p are distinct). In the second case et p i for some i with 1 i m be the first occurrence of c in p, et p i 1 = p 1...p i 1, and et p i 1 = p 1...p i 1. Furthermore, for every b Σ p {? 1,...,? q } and w (Σ p {? 1,...,? q }), we denote by #(b,w) the number of times b occurs in w. Then f(c) = t cs+1...t cs+ f(c) where c s = i 1 j=1 f(p j ), which impies that the vaue of f(c) is fuy determined by c s and f(c). Because the number of possibe vaues for f(c) is triviay bounded by the parameters (it is bounded by max i f(p i ) ), it remains to show that aso c s is bounded by the given parameters. Because c s = i 1 j=1 f(p j ) = ( b Σ p {? 1,...,? q} #(b,p i 1 ) f(b) ), we obtain that the vaue of c s is fuy determined by the vaues of #(b,p i 1) and f(b) for every b Σ p {? 1,...,? q }. For every? {? 1,...,? q } there are at most 2 possibe vaues for #(?,p i 1) (namey 0 and 1) and there are at most max f(?) possibe vaues for f(?). Simiary, for every b Σ p there are at most q +1 possibe vauesfor#(b,p i 1) (the vaues#(b,p i 1 ) q,...,#(b,p i 1 )) andthere areat mostmax i f(p i ) possibe vaues for f(b). Hence, the number of possibe vaues for c s is bounded in terms of the parameters, as required. Since Σ p and #Σ p together bound #?, we obtain the foowing coroary. Coroary 2. Max-GFM and Max-GPM parameterized by #Σ p, Σ p, max i f(p i ), and max f(?) are fixed-parameter tractabe. Furthermore, because a considered parameters can be bounded in terms of the parameters #Σ t and Σ t, we obtain the foowing coroary as a consequence of any of our above fpt-resuts. Coroary 3. Max-GFM and Max-GPM parameterized by #Σ t and Σ t are fixed-parameter tractabe. 4 Hardness Resuts In this subsection we give our hardness resuts for Max-GFM and Max-GPM. Theorem 3. Max-GFM and Max-GPM are W[1]-hard parameterized by Σ p, max i f(p i ), and max f(?) (even if max i f(p i ) = 1 and max f(?) = 2). We wi show the theorem by a parameterized reduction from Muticoored Cique. To simpify the proof we wi reduce to the variant of Max-GFM and Max-GPM, where we are aowed to map widcards to the empty string. It is however straightforward to adapt the proof to the origina versions of Max-GFM and Max-GPM. Hence, in the foowing, whenever we refer to Max-GFM and Max-GPM, we mean the version of Max-GFM and Max-GPM, where widcards can be mapped to the empty string. Let G = (V,E) be a k-partite graph with partition V 1,...,V k of V. Let E i,j = {{u,v} E u V i and v V j } for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Again, as we stated in the preiminaries we can assume that V i = n and E i,j = m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. 5

6 Let V i = {v1,...,v i n} i and E i,j = {e i,j 1,...,ei,j m}. We construct a text t and a pattern p from G and k such that p r-gf/gp-matches t with r = ( k 2) (8(m 1)) if and ony if G has a k-cique. We set Σ t = {;,,#, } {v j i 1 i n and 1 j k} and Σ p = {;,,#, } {V i 1 i k}. For an edge e E between v i and vj k where 1 i < j k and 1,k n, we write vt(e) to denote the text v i vj k. For Σ p Σ t and i N we write rp(,i) to denote the text consisting of repeating the etter exacty i times. We first define a preiminary text t as foows. #;vt(e 1,2 1 );;vt(e1,2 m );##;vt(e1,k 1 );;vt(e1,k m ); #;vt(e 2,3 1 );;vt(e2,3 m );##;vt(e2,k 1 );;vt(e2,k m ); #;vt(e k 1,k 1 );;vt(e k 1,k m );# We aso need to define a preiminary pattern p as foows. #rp(,4(m 1));V 1 V 2 ;rp(,4(m 1))#... #rp(,4(m 1));V 1 V k ;rp(,4(m 1)) #rp(,4(m 1));V 2 V 3 ;rp(,4(m 1))#... #rp(,4(m 1));V 2 V k ;rp(,4(m 1)) #rp(,4(m 1));V k 1 V k ;rp(,4(m 1))# We obtain t from t and p from p by preceding t and p, respectivey, with the foowing text or pattern, respectivey. rp(,2r+1)rp(;,2r+1)rp(,2r+1)rp(#,2r+1) This competes the construction of t and p. Ceary, t and p can be constructed from G and k in fpt-time (even poynomia time). Furthermore, Σ p = k+4, as required. It remains to showthat G has a k-cique if and ony if p r-gf/gp-matches t. Lemma 2. If G has a k-cique then p r-gf/gp-matches t. Proof. Let {v 1 h 1,...,v k h k } be the vertices and {e i,j 1 i < j k} be the edges of a k-cique of G with 1 h j n and 1 m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. The function f that r-gf/gp-matching p to t is defined as foows: f( ) =, f(;) =;, f( ) =, f(#) = #, f(v i ) = v i h 1, for every i with 1 i k. We put r widcards on the ast r occurrences of in p, i.e., every occurrence of that corresponds to an occurrence in p. Then ength of the text the widcards are mapped to is determined as foows. For an edge e i,j ook at the bock in p that corresponds to the edge, i.e., the bock: #rp(,4(m 1));V i V j ;rp(,4(m 1)) The first 4(m ) occurrences of (in this bock) are repaced with a widcard which is mapped to a text of ength 0, the ast 4(m ) occurrences of are repaced with a widcard which is mapped to a text of ength 2, and a other occurrences of are repaced with a widcard that is mapped to a text of ength 1. It is straightforward to check that f together with the mapping of the widcards maps the pattern p to the text t. For the reverse direction we need the foowing intermediate caims. Caim 1. For any function f that r-gf/gp-matches p to t it hods that: f( ) =, f(;) =;, f( ) =, and f(#) = #. 6

7 Proof. We show that f( ) = since the remaining cases are simiar. Because the pattern p starts with 2r+1 repetitions of the etter, it foows that at east 1 of these occurrences of is not repaced with a widcard. Because every etter of p is repaced by at most 2 etters of the text the first occurrence of that is not repaced by a widcard is mapped to a etter of the text at position at most 2r, i.e., a. This concudes the proof of the caim. Caim 2. Any r-gf/gp-matching of p to t repaces exacty the ast r occurrences of in p with widcards. Proof. It foows from the previous caim that f( ) = for any function that r-gf/gp-matches p to t. Because every etter of p that is not repaced with a widcard is repaced with exacty 1 etter from the text, it foows that the first occurrence of in p that corresponds to an occurrence of in p is mapped to (if it is not repaced with a widcard) to a etter of the text at position at east 7r + 5. However, since the text t does not contain the etter after position 2r +1, this occurrence of in p (and a other occurrences of in p that foow) has to be repaced with a widcard. Since p contains exacty r occurrences of the ony etters of p that are repaced with widcards are these occurrences of. Lemma 3. If p r-gf/gp-matches t then G has a k-cique. Proof. Let f be a function that r-gf/gp-matches p to t. Because of Caim 9, it hods that f( ) =, f(;) =;, f( ) =, and f(#) = #. Furthermore, because of Caim 9 the ony etters in p that are repaced with widcards are the ast r occurrences of in p. Because the number of occurrences of the etter # is the same in t and p each occurrence of # in p has to be mapped to its corresponding occurrence in t. It foows that for every i and j with 1 i < j k the bock rp(,4(m 1));V i V j ;rp(,4(m 1)) in p has to be mapped to the corresponding bock ;vt(e i,j 1 );;vt(ei,j m); in t. Hence, the part V i V j has to be mapped to vt(e i,j ) for every 1 m. Consequenty, the set {f(v i ) 1 i k} is a k-cique of G. This concudes the proof of Theorem 3. Theorem 4. Max-GFM and Max-GPM are W[1]-hard parameterized by #Σ t, #Σ p, Σ p, max i f(p i ), and #?. We wi show the theorem by a parameterized reduction from Muticoored Cique. Let G = (V,E) be a k-partite graph with partition V 1,...,V k of V. Let E i,j = {{u,v} E u V i and v V j } for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Again, as we stated in the preiminaries we can assume that V i = n and E i,j = m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Let V i = {v1,...,v i n} i and E i,j = {e i,j 1,...,ei,j m}, and k = 2 ( k 2) +k(k+2). We construct a text t over aphabet Σ t and a pattern p over aphabet Σ p from G and k such that p k -GF/GP-matches t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 1 if and ony if G has a k-cique. The aphabet Σ t consists of: the etter # (used as a separator); the etter + (used to forced the widcards); one etter a e for every e E (representing the edges of G); one etter # i for every i with 1 i n (used as specia separators that group edges from the same vertex); the etters i,j, r i,j, i, r i for every i and j with 1 i < j k (used as dummy etters to ensure injectivity for GPM); 7

8 the etter d v e and d v for every e E and v V(G) with v e (used as dummy etters to ensure injectivity for GPM). We set Σ p = {#,D} {E i,j 1 i < j k}. For a vertex v V and j with 1 j k we denote by E j (v) the set of edges of G that are incident to v and whose other endpoint is in V j. Furthermore, for a vertex v V(G), we write e(v) to denote the text e(v,e 1 (v))e(v,e k (v))d v, where e(v,e ), for vertex v and a set E of edges with E = {e 1,...,e }, is the text d v e 1 e e1 d v e 2 e e2 d v e a e. We first define the foowing preiminary text and pattern strings. Let t 1 be the text: # 1,2 a e 1,2 1 # 2,3 a e 2,3 1 a e 1,2 r 1,2## m 1,k a e 1,k a 1 e 1,k r 1,k m a e 2,3 r 2,3## m 2,k a e 2,k a 1 e 2,k r 2,k m Let t 2 be the text: # k 1,k a e k 1,k 1 a e k 1,kr m k 1,k # 1 # 1 e(v 1 1 )# 1# n e(v 1 n )# nr 1 # k # 1 e(v k 1 )# 1# n e(v k n )# nr k # Let p 1 be the pattern: #DE 1,2 D#...#DE 1,k D #DE 2,3 D#...#DE 2,k D #DE k 1,k D For i, j with 1 i,j k, et I(i,j) be the etter E i,j if i < j, the etter E j,i if i > j and the empty string if i = j. We define p(1) to be the pattern:, we define p(k) to be the pattern: A 1 DI(1,2)DI(1,3)DI(1,k)DA 1 A k DI(k,1)DI(k,2)DI(k,k 1)DA k, and for every i with 1 < i < k, we define p(i) to be the pattern: Then p 2 is the pattern: A i DI(i,1)DI(i,2)DI(i,i 1)DI(i,i+1)DI(i,k)DA i #L 1 p(1)r 1 ##L k p(k)r k # Let r = 2(k +1). For Σ p Σ t and i N wewriterp(,i)to denotethe text consistingofrepeatingthe etter exacty i times. We aso define t 0 to be the text #rp(+,r) and p 0 to be the pattern #rp(d,r). Then, t is the concatenation of t 0, t 1 and t 2 and p is a concatenation of p 0, p 1 and p 2. This competes the construction of t and p. Ceary, t and p can be constructed from G and k in fpt-time (even poynomia time). Furthermore, #Σ t = r, #Σ p = r +k, Σ p = ( k 2) +k+2 and hence bounded by k, as required. It remains to show that G has a k-cique if and ony if p k -GF/GP-matches t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 1. Lemma 4. If G has a k-cique then p k -GF/GP-matches t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 1. 8

9 Proof. Let {v 1 h 1,...,v k h k } be the vertices and {e i,j 1 i < j k} be the edges of a k-cique of G with 1 h i n and 1 m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. We put k widcards on the ast k occurrences of D in p. The mapping of these widcards is defined very simiar to the mapping of the etters L i,j, R i,j, L i, R i, and D i,j in the proof of Lemma 12 and wi not be repeated here. Using this mapping ensures that every widcard is mapped to an non-empty substring of t and no two widcards are mapped to the same substring of t. We define the function f that k -GF/GP-matches p to t as foows: We set f(#) = # and f(d) = +. Moreover, for every i and j with 1 i < j k, we set f(e i,j ) = a e i,j and f(a i ) = # i. It is straightforward to check that f together with above mapping for the widcards k -GF/GPmatches p to t. Caim 3. Let f be a function that k -GF/GP-matches p to t with max p Σp f(p) = 1, then: f(#) = # and f(d) = +. Moreover, a widcards have to be paced on a the k occurrences of D in p. Proof. We first show that f(d) = +. Observe that the ony squares in the string t are contained in t 0 (reca the definition of square-free from Section 2). It foows that every two consecutive occurrences of pattern etters in p 0 have to be mapped to a substring of t 0. Because there are 2(k +1) occurrences of D in p 0 it foows that at east two consecutive occurrences of D in p 0 are not repaced with widcards and hence D has to be mapped to a substring of t 0. Furthermore, since a occurrences of D are at the end of p 0, we obtain that D has to be mapped to +, as required. Because a occurrences of D in p have to be mapped to substrings of the concatenation of t 1 and t 2, but these strings do not contain the etter +, it foows that a the k occurrences of D in p 1 and p 2 have to be repaced by widcards. Since we are ony aowed to use at most k widcards, this shows the second statement of the caim. Since no widcards are used to repace etters in p 0 it now easiy foows that f(#) = #. Lemma 5. If p k -GF/GP-matches t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 1, then G has a k-cique. Proof. Let f be a function that k -GF/GP-matches p to t with max p Σp f(p) = 1. Because of Caim 3, we know that f(#) = # and that no occurrence of # in p is repaced by a widcard. Because t and p have the same number of occurrences of #, it foows that the i-th occurrences of # in p has to be mapped to the i-th occurrence of # in t. We obtain that: (1) For every i, j with 1 i < j k, the substring DE i,j D of p has to be mapped to the substring i,j a e i,j a 1 e i,j r i,j of t. m (2) For every i with 1 i k, the substring L i p(i)r i of p has to be mapped to the substring i # 1 e(v i 1)# 1# n e(v i n)# n r i of t. Because for every i with 1 i k the etters # j are the ony etters that occur more than once in the substring i # 1 e(v i 1)# 1# n e(v i n)# n r i of t, we obtain from (2) that A i has to be mapped to # j for some j with 1 j n. Consequenty: (3) for every i with 1 i k, the substring p(i) of p has to be mapped to a substring # j e(v i j )# j of t for some j with 1 j n. It foows from (1) that for every i, j with 1 i < j k, f(e i,j ) is mapped to an edge between V i and V j. Furthermore, because of (3) it foows that for every i with 1 i k, it hods that the edges mapped to any E,r with 1 < r k such that = i or r = i have the same endpoint in V i. Hence, the set of edges mapped to the etters E i,j for 1 i < j k form a k-cique of G. This concudes the proof of Theorem 4. Theorem 5. (Max-)GFM and (Max-)GPM are W[1]-hard parameterized by #Σ t, #Σ p, max i f(p i ), #?, and max f(?). 9

10 We wi show the above theorem by a parameterized reduction from Muticoored Cique. Let G = (V,E) be a k-partite graph with partition V 1,...,V k of V. Let E i,j = {{u,v} E u V i and v V j } for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Again, as we stated in the preiminaries we can assume that V i = n and E i,j = m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Let V i = {v1 i,...,vi n} and E i,j = {e i,j 1,...,ei,j m}. For a vertex v V i and j with 1 j k we denote by E j (v) the set of edges of G that are incident to v and whose other endpoint is in V j. We construct a text t over aphabet Σ t and a pattern p over aphabet Σ p from G and k such that the foowing two conditions hod: (C1) the parameters #Σ t and #Σ p are bounded by k (note the parameters #? and max f(?) are bounded since we consider GFM and GPM). (C2) p GF/GP-matches t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) 2 if and ony if G has a k-cique. Let r = 2kn(n 1)+2n+(k 1)m 1. The aphabet Σ t consists of (1) the etter #, (2) the etters i,j and r i,j for every 1 i < j k and 1 m 1, (3) the etters v,j and r v,j for every v V i, 1 j k, and 1 n 1, where 1 i k and j i, (4) the etters i and ri for every 1 i k and 1 r, (5) the etter e i,j for every 1 i < j k and 1 m, and (6) the etter # i for every 1 i n. The aphabet Σ p consists of (1) the etter #, (2) the etters L i,j and R i,j for every 1 i < j k and 1 m 1, (3) the etters LL i,j and RR i,j for every 1 i,j k with i j, and 1 n 1, (4) the etters L i and Ri for every 1 i k and 1 r, (5) the etter E i,j for every 1 i < j k, and (6) the etter A i for every 1 i n. For a symbo and i N, we write enu(,i) to denote the text 1 i. Furthermore, for a vertex v V(G) and i with 1 i k, we write e(v,i) to denote the text e(e i (v)), where e(e ) (for a set of edges E ) is a ist of a the etters in Σ t that correspond to the edges in E. We first define the foowing preiminary text and pattern strings. For i and j with 1 i < j k, we denote by t(i,j) the text enu( i,j,m 1)enu(e i,j,m)enu(r i,j,m 1). We define t 1 to be the text: #t(1,2)##t(1,k) #t(2,3)##t(2,k) #t(k 1,k)# Foravertexv V i, andj with1 j k, wedenotebyt(v,j) thetextenu( v,j,n 1)e(v,j)enu(r v,j,n 1) if j i and the empty text if j = i. Furthermore, we denote by t(v) the text t(v,1)t(v,k). Let t 2 be the text: enu( 1,r)# 1 t(v 1 1 )# 1# n t(v 1 n )# nenu(r 1,r) #enu( k,r)# 1 t(v k 1 )# 1# n t(v k n )# nenu(r k,r) For i and j with 1 i < j k, we denote by p(i,j) the pattern enu(l i,j,m 1)E i,j enu(r i,j,m 1). Let p 1 be the pattern: #p(1,2)#...#p(1,k) #p(2,3)#...#p(2,k) #p(k 1,k)# For i, j with 1 i,j k, et I(i,j) be the etter E i,j if i < j, the etter E j,i if i > j and the empty string if i = j. Furthermore, et pe(i,j) be the pattern enu(ll i,j,n 1)I(i,j)enu(RR i,j,n 1) if i j and the empty pattern otherwise. Let p 2 be the pattern: 10

11 enu(l 1,r)A 1 pe(1,1)pe(1,k)a 1 enu(r 1,r) #enu(l k,r)a k pe(k,1)pe(k,k)a k enu(r k,r) We aso define t 0 to be the text ## and p 0 to be the pattern ##. Then, t is the concatenation of t 0, t 1 and t 2 and p is a concatenation of p 0, p 1 and p 2. This competes the construction of t and p. Ceary, t and p can be constructed from G and k in fpt-time (even poynomia time). Furthermore, because #Σ t = ( ) k 2 +k+2, #Σp = ( k 2) +k+2, condition (C1) is satisfied. To show the remaining condition (C2) we need the foowing intermediate emmas and caims. Lemma 6. If G has a k-cique then p GF/GP-matches t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 2. Proof. Let {vh 1 1,...,vh k k } be the vertices and {e i,j 1 i < j k} be the edges of a k-cique of G with 1 h j n and 1 m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. We first give the GF/GP-matching function f for the etters in Σ p that occur more than once in p as foows: We set f(#) = #, f(e i,j ) = e i,i, and f(a i ) = # hi, for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Informay, we wi map the remaining etters in Σ p to substrings of t of ength between 1 and 2 in such a way that the occurrences of the etters #, E i,j, and A i are paced over the right positions in the text t. More formay, we define f for the remaining etters in Σ p as foows: For every 1 i < j k, we define f(l i,j ) in such a way that f(l i,j ) = 2 for every 1 1 and f(l i,j ) = 1 for every 1 < m 1. Forevery1 i < j k, we define f(r i,j ) in such away that f(r i,j ) = 1 for every1 +1 and f(l i,j ) = 2 for every +1 < m 1. For every 1 i,j k with i j, we define f(ll i,j ) in such a way that f(ll i,j ) = 2 for every 1 s 1, where s is the position of e i,j in t(v hi,j) and f(ll i,j ) = 1 for every s < n 1. For every 1 i,j k with i j, we define f(rr i,j ) in such a way that f(rr i,j ) = 1 for every 1 s+1, wheresis the position ofe i,j in t(v hi,j) and f(rr i,j ) = 1for everys+1 < n 1. For every 1 i k, we define f(l i ) in such a way that f(li ) = 2 for every 1 s 1, where s is position of # hi in the substring # 1 t(v1)# i 1# n t(vn)# i n of t and f(l i,j ) = 1 for every s < r. For every 1 i k, we define f(r i) in such a way that f(ri ) = 1 for every 1 s + 1, where s is position of # hi in the substring # 1 t(v1)# i 1# n t(vn)# i n of t and f(r i,j ) = 2 for every s+1 < r. It isnowstraightforwardtocheckthat f GF/GP-matchesptotandmax p Σp f(p) = 2, asrequired. To prove the reverse direction we need the foowing intermediate caim. Caim 4. For any function f that k -GF/GP-matches p to t it hods that: f(;) =;, f(#) = #, and f(q) = +. Moreover, a widcards have to be paced on a the k occurrences of Q in p. Proof. We first show that f(q) = +. Observe that the concatenation of the strings t 1 and t 2 is squarefree(reca the definition of square-free from Section 2). It foows that every two consecutive occurrences of pattern etters in p 0 have to be mapped to a substring of t 0. Because there are 2(k +1) occurrences of Q in p 0 it foows that at east two consecutive occurrences of Q in p 0 are not repaced with widcards and hence Q has to be mapped to a substring of t 0. Furthermore, since a occurrences of Q are at the end of p 0, we obtain that Q has to be mapped to +, as required. Because a occurrences of Q in p 1 and p 2 have to be mapped to substrings of the concatenation of t 1 and t 2 but neither t 1 nor t 2 contain the etter +, it foows that a the k occurrences of Q in p 1 and p 2 have to be repaced by widcards. Since we are ony aowed to use at most k widcards, this shows the second statement of the caim. Since no widcards are used to repace etters in p 0 it now aso foows that f(;) =; and f(#) = #. 11

12 Lemma 7. If p GF/GP-matches t using a a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 2, then G has a k-cique. Proof. Let f be the function that GF/GP-matches p to t with max p Σp f(p) = 2. We first show that f(#) = #. Suppose for a contradiction that f(#) # Because t and p start with ## it foows that f(#) is a string that starts with ##. However, t does not contain any other occurrence of the string ## and hence the remaining occurrences of # in p cannot be matched by f. Because t and p have the same number of occurrences of #, it foows that the i-th occurrences of # in p has to be mapped to the i-th occurrence of # in t. We obtain that: (1) for every i, j with 1 i < j k, the substring p(i,j) of p has to be mapped to the substring t(i,j) of t. (2) for every i with 1 i k, the substring enu(l i,r)a i pe(i,1)pe(i,k)a i enu(r i,r) of p has to be mapped to the substring enu( i,r)# 1 t(v i 1)# 1# n t(v i n)# n enu(r i,r) of t. Because for every i with 1 i k the etters # j are the ony etters that occur more than once in the substring enu( i,r)# 1 t(v i 1)# 1# n t(v i n)# n enu(r i,r) of t, we obtain that A i has to be mapped to # j for some j with 1 j n. Consequenty: (3) for every i with 1 i k, the substring A i pe(i,1)pe(i,k)a i of p has to be mapped a substring # j t(v i j )# j of t for some j with 1 j n. It foows from (1) that for every i, j with 1 i < j k, the function f maps E i,j to edges between V i and V j. W..o.g. we can assume that E i,j is mapped to exacty one such edge because mapping it to many edges makes it ony harder to map the foowing occurrences of E i,j in p. Because of (3) it foows that for every i with 1 i k, it hods that the edges mapped to any E,r with 1 < r k such that = i or r = i have the same endpoint in V i. Hence, the set of edges mapped to a the etters E i,j for 1 i < j k form a k-cique of G. This concudes the proof of Theorem 5. Theorem 6. Max-GFM and Max-GPM are W[1]-hard parameterized by #Σ p, Σ p, max i f(p i ), and #? (even if max i f(p i ) = 1). We wi show the above theorem by a parameterized reduction from Muticoored Cique. Let G = (V,E) be a k-partite graph with partition V 1,...,V k of V. Let E i,j = {{u,v} E u V i and v V j } for every i and j with 1 i < j k. As we stated in the preiminaries we can assume that V i = n and E i,j = m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Let V i = {v1,...,v i n}, i E i,j = {e i,j 1,...,ei,j m}, and k = 2 ( k 2). We construct a text t over aphabet Σt and a pattern p over aphabet Σ p from G and k in poynomia time such that: (C1) the parameters #Σ p, Σ p, and #? can be bounded as a function of k. (C2) p k -GF/GP-matches t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 1 if and ony if G has a k-cique. We set Σ t = {;,,#,+} { i,j,r i,j 1 i < j k} {v j i 1 i n and 1 j k} and Σ p = {;,,#,D} {V i 1 i k}. For an edge e E between v i and vj s where 1 i < j k and 1,s n, we write vt(e) to denote the text v i vj s. For Σ p Σ t and i N we write rp(,i) to denote the text consisting of repeating the etter exacty i times. We first define a preiminary text t as foows. # 1,2 ;vt(e 1,2 1 );;vt(e1,2 m );r 1,2 ## 1,k ;vt(e 1,k 1 );;vt(e1,k m );r 1,k # 2,3 ;vt(e 2,3 1 );;vt(e2,3 m );r 2,3 ## 2,k ;vt(e 2,k 1 );;vt(e2,k m );r 2,k We aso define a preiminary pattern p as foows. # k 1,k ;vt(e k 1,k 1 );;vt(e k 1,k m );r k 1,k # 12

13 #D;V 1 V 2 ;D#...#D;V 1 V k ;D #D;V 2 V 3 ;D#...#D;V 2 V k ;D #D;V k 1 V k ;D# Let r = 2(k +1). Then t is obtained by preceding t with the text t defined as foows. #; rp(+,r) Simiary, p is obtained by preceding p with the text p defined as foows. #; rp(d,r) This competes the construction of t and p. Ceary, t and p can be constructed from G and k in fpt-time (even poynomia time). Furthermore, because #Σ p = r +k = 2(k +1)+k = 3k +1, Σ p = k +4, and #? = k, condition (C1) above is satisfied. To show the remaining condition (C2), we need the foowing intermediate emmas. Lemma 8. If G has a k-cique, then p k -GF/GP-matches to t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 1. Proof. Let {vh 1 1,...,vh k k } be the vertices and {e i,j 1 i < j k} be the edges of a k-cique of G with 1 h j n and 1 m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. We put k widcards on the ast k occurrences of D in p. Informay, these widcards are mapped in suchawaythatforevery1 i < j k the substring;v i V j ;ofthe patternpismapped tothe substring ;vt(e i,j ); of the text t. More formay, for i and j with 1 i < j k et q = ( o<i o=1 (k o))+j. We map the widcard on the 2(q 1)-th occurrence of the etter D in p with the text i,j ;vt(e i,j 1 );;vt(ei,j h ) i,j 1 and simiary we map the widcard on the (2(q 1)+1)-th occurrence of the etter D in p with the text vt(e i,j +1 );;vt(ei,j m );r i,j. Note that in this way every widcard is mapped to a non-empty substring of t and no two widcards are mapped to the same substring of t, as required. We then define the k -GF/GP-matching function f as foows: f(;) =;, f( ) =, f(#) = #, f(v i ) = vh i i, f(d) = +, for every i and h i with 1 i k and 1 h i n. It is straightforward to check that f together with the mapping for the widcards maps the pattern p to the text t. Lemma 9. Let f be a function that k -GF/GP-matches p to t with max p Σp f(p) = 1, then: f(;) =;, f( ) =, f(#) = #, and f(d) = +. Moreover, a widcards have to be paced on a the k occurrences of D in p. Proof. We first show that f(d) = +. Observe that the string t is square-free (reca the definition of square-free from Section 2). It foows that every two consecutive occurrences of pattern etters in p have to be mapped to a substring of t. Because there are 2(k +1) occurrences of D in p it foows that at east two consecutive occurrences of D in p are not repaced with widcards and hence D has to be mapped to a substring of t. Furthermore, since a occurrences of D are at the end of p, we obtain that D has to be mapped to +, as required. Because a occurrences of D in p have to be mapped to substrings of t and t does not contain the etter +, it foows that a the k occurrences of D in p have to be repaced by widcards. Since we are ony aowed to use at most k widcards, this shows the second statement of the emma. Since no widcards are used to repace etters in p it now easiy foows that f(;) =;, f( ) = and f(#) = #. Lemma 10. If p k -GF/GP-matches to t using a function f with max p Σp f(p) = 1, then G has a k-cique. Proof. Let f be a function that k -GF/GP-matches p to t such that max p Σp f(p) = 1. We caim that the set {f(v i ) 1 i k} is a k-cique of G. Because of Lemma 9, we know that f(#) = # and that no occurrence of # in p is repaced by a widcard. Since the number of occurrences of # in t is equa to the number of occurrences of # in p, we obtain that the i-th occurrence of # in p is mapped to the i-th 13

14 occurrence of # in t. Consequenty, for every i and j with 1 i < j k, we obtain that the substring ;V i V j ; is mapped to a substring of the string i,j ;vt(e i,j 1 );;vt(ei,j m );r i,j in t. Again, using Lemma 9 and the fact that max p Σp f(p) = 1, we obtain that both V i and V j are mapped to some etter v i and vs j for some and s with 1,s n such that {v i,vj s} E. Hence, {f(v i ) 1 i k} is a k-cique of G. Because Condition (C2) is impied by Lemmas 8 and 10, this concudes the proof of Theorem 6. Theorem 7. (Max-)GFM and (Max-)GPM are W[1]-hard parameterized by #Σ t, #Σ p, Σ p, #?, and max f(?). We wi show the theorem by a parameterized reduction from Muticoored Cique. Let G = (V,E) be a k-partite graph with partition V 1,...,V k of V. Let E i,j = {{u,v} E u V i and v V j } for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Again, as we stated in the preiminaries we can assume that V i = n and E i,j = m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. Let V i = {v1 i,...,vi n } and E i,j = {e i,j 1,...,ei,j m }. We construct a text t and a pattern p from G and k such that p GF/GP-matches t if and ony if G has a k-cique. The aphabet Σ t consists of: the etter # (used as a separator); one etter a e for every e E (representing the edges of G); one etter # i for every i with 1 i n (used as specia separators that group edges from the same vertex); the etters i,j, r i,j, i, r i for every i and j with 1 i < j k (used as dummy etters to ensure injectivity for GPM); the etter d v e and dv for every e E and v V(G) with v e (used as dummy etters to ensure injectivity for GPM). We set Σ p = {#} {E i,j,l i,j,r i,j,l i,r i,a i 1 i < j k} {D i,j 1 i k and 1 j k +1}. For a vertex v V and j with 1 j k we denote by E j (v) the set of edges of G that are incident to v and whose other endpoint is in V j. Furthermore, for a vertex v V(G), we write e(v) to denote the text e(v,e 1 (v))e(v,e k (v))d v, where e(v,e ), for vertex v and a set E of edges with E = {e 1,...,e }, is the text d v e 1 a e1 d v e 2 a e2 d v e a e. We first define the foowing preiminary text and pattern strings. Let t 1 be the text: # 1,2 a e 1,2 1 # 2,3 a e 2,3 1 a e 1,2 r 1,2## m 1,k a e 1,k a r 1 e 1,k 1,k m a e 2,3 r 2,3## m 2,k a e 2,k a r 1 e 2,k 2,k m Let t 2 be the text: # k 1,k a e k 1,k 1 a e k 1,kr m k 1,k # 1 # 1 e(v 1 1 )# 1# n e(v 1 n )# nr 1 # k # 1 e(v k 1)# 1# n e(v k n)# n r k # Let p 1 be the pattern: #L 1,2 E 1,2 R 1,2 #...#L 1,k E 1,k R 1,k #L 2,3 E 2,3 R 2,3 #...#L 2,k E 2,k R 2,k #L k 1,k E k 1,k R k 1,k 14

15 For i, j with 1 i,j k, et I(i,j) be the etter E i,j if i < j, the etter E j,i if i > j and the empty string if i = j. We define p(1) to be the pattern: we define p(k) to be the pattern: A 1 D 1,2 I(1,2)D 1,3 I(1,3)D 1,k I(1,k)D 1,k+1 A 1 A k D k,1 I(k,1)D k,2 I(k,2)D k,k 1 I(k,k 1)D k,k+1 A k and for every i with 1 < i < k, we define p(i) to be the pattern: Then p 2 is the pattern: A i D i,1 I(i,1)D i,2 I(i,2)D i,i 1 I(i,i 1) D i,i+1 I(i,i+1)D i,k I(i,k)D i,k+1 A i #L 1 p(1)r 1 ##L k p(k)r k # We aso define t 0 to be the text ## and p 0 to be the pattern ##. Then, t is the concatenation of t 0, t 1 and t 2 and p is a concatenation of p 0, p 1 and p 2. This competes the construction of t and p. Ceary, t and p can be constructed from G and k in fpt-time (even poynomia time). Furthermore, #Σ t = ( ) k 2 + k + 3, #Σp = ( k 2) + k + 3, Σp = k(k+1)+3 ( k 2) +3k+1 and hence bounded by k, as required. It remains to show that G has a k-cique if and ony if p GF/GP-matches t. Lemma 11. If G has a k-cique then p GF/GP-matches t. Proof. Let {vh 1 1,...,vh k k } be the vertices and {e i,j 1 i < j k} be the edges of a k-cique of G with 1 h i n and 1 m for every i and j with 1 i < j k. We define the function f that GF/GP-matches p to t as foows: We set f(#) = # and f(;) =;. Moreover, for every i and j with 1 i < j k, we set f(e i,j ) = a e i,j, f(a i ) = # i, f(l i,j ) = i,j a e i,j a 1 e i,j, f(r i,j ) = a 1 e i,j a +1 e i,j r i,j, f(l m i ) =; i # 1 e(v1)# i 1# hi 1e(vh i )# i 1 h i 1, and f(r i ) = # hi+1e(vh i )# i+1 h i+1# n e(vn i)# nr i. For every i and j with i j, et e(i,j) be the edge e i,j if i < j and the edge e j,i h j,i, otherwise. Then, the etters D i,j are mapped as foows: For every i and j with 1 i k, 2 j k, i j, and (i,j) (1,2), we map f(d i,j ) to the substring of e(v i h i ) in between the occurrences (and not incuding these occurrences) of the etters e(i,j 1) and e(i,j). We map f(d 1,2 ) to be the prefix of e(v 1 h 1 ) ending before the etter e(1,2). For every i with 2 i k, we map f(d i,1 ) to the prefix of e(v i h i ) ending before the etter e(i,1). For every i with 1 i < k, we map f(d i,k+1 ) to the suffix of e(v i h i ) starting after the etter e(i,k). We map f(d k,k+1 ) to be the suffix of e(v 1 h 1 ) starting after the etter e(k,k 1). It is straightforward to check that f GF/GP-matches p to t. Lemma 12. If p GF/GP-matches t then G has a k-cique. Proof. Let f be a function that GF/GP-matches p to t. We first show that f(#) = #. Suppose for a contradiction that f(#) #. Because t and p start with ## it foows that f(#) is a string that starts with ##. However, t does not contain any other occurrence of the string ## and hence the remaining occurrences of # in p cannot be matched by f. Because t and p have the same number of occurrences of #, it foows that the i-th occurrences of # in p has to be mapped to the i-th occurrence of # in t. We obtain that: 15

16 (1) For every i, j with 1 i < j k, the substring L i,j E i,j R i,j of p has to be mapped to the substring i,j a e i,j a 1 e i,j r i,j of t. m (2) For every i with 1 i k, the substring L i p(i)r i of p has to be mapped to the substring i # 1 e(v i 1 )# 1# n e(v i n )# nr i of t. Because for every i with 1 i k the etters # j are the ony etters that occur more than once in the substring i # 1 e(v i 1)# 1# n e(v i n)# n r i of t, we obtain from (2) that A i has to be mapped to # j for some j with 1 j n. Consequenty: (3) for every i with 1 i k, the substring p(i) of p has to be mapped to a substring # j e(v i j )# j of t for some j with 1 j n. It foows from (1) that for every i, j with 1 i < j k, f(e i,j ) is mapped to some edges between V i and V j. W..o.g. we can assume that f(e i,j ) is mapped to exacty one edge between V i and V j, because mapping it to more than one edge woud make the matching of the atter occurrences of E i,j in p even harder, i.e., whenever a atter occurrence of E i,j in p can be mapped to more than one edge it aso can be mapped to any of these edges. Furthermore, because of (3) it foows that for every i with 1 i k, it hods that the edges mapped to any E,r with 1 < r k such that = i or r = i have the same endpoint in V i. Hence, the set of edges mapped to the etters E i,j for 1 i < j k form a k-cique of G. This concudes the proof of Theorem 7. References [1] Amihood Amir and Igor Nor. Generaized function matching. Journa of Discrete Agorithms, 5(3): , [2] Dana Anguin. Finding patterns common to a set of strings (extended abstract). In Proceedings of the 11h Annua ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Apri 30 - May 2, 1979, Atanta, Georgia, USA, pages , [3] Dana Anguin. Finding patterns common to a set of strings. Journa of Computer and System Sciences, 21(1):46 62, [4] Raphaë Cifford, Aram W. Harrow, Aexandru Popa, and Benjamin Sach. Generaised matching. In Jussi Kargren, Jorma Tarhio, and Heikki Hyyrö, editors, String Processing and Information Retrieva, 16th Internationa Symposium, SPIRE 2009, Saarisekä, Finand, August 25-27, 2009, Proceedings, voume 5721 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages Springer, [5] Raphaë Cifford and Aexandru Popa. (In)approximabiity resuts for pattern matching probems. In Jan Houb and Jan Zdárek, editors, Proceedings of the Prague Stringoogy Conference 2010, Prague, Czech Repubic, August 30 - September 1, 2010, pages Prague Stringoogy Cub, Department of Theoretica Computer Science, Facuty of Information Technoogy, Czech Technica University in Prague, [6] Rodney G. Downey and Michae R. Feows. Parameterized Compexity. Monographs in Computer Science. Springer Verag, New York, [7] Andrzej Ehrenfreucht and Grzegorz Rozenberg. Finding a homomorphism between two words in np-compete. Information Processing Letters, 9(2):86 88, [8] Henning Fernau and Markus L. Schmid. Pattern matching with variabes: A mutivariate compexity anaysis. In Johannes Fischer and Peter Sanders, editors, Combinatoria Pattern Matching, 24th Annua Symposium, CPM 2013, Bad Herrenab, Germany, June 17-19, Proceedings, voume 7922 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages Springer,