Alphabet Partitioning for Compressed Rank/Select with Applications Jérémy Barbay 1, Travis Gagie 1, Gonzalo Navarro 1 and Yakov Nekrich 2 1 Department of Computer Science University of Chile {jbarbay, tgagie, gnavarro}@dcc.uchile.cl arxiv:0911.4981v1 [cs.ds] 25 Nov 2009 2 Department of Computer Science University of Bonn yasha@cs.uni-bonn.de Abstract. We show show how, if we have a data structure that efficiently supports access, rank and select queries on strings in compressed form, and another that supports those queries efficiently on strings over large alphabets, we can combine their strengths via alphabet partitioning. Specifically, we present a data structure that stores a string s[1..n] over alphabet [1..σ] in nh 0(s)+o(n)(H 0(s)+1) bits, where H 0(s) is the zero-order entropy of s, and supports access and rank queries in time O (log log σ) and select queries in O (1) time. We also show how our data structure can be used to store strings and text self-indexes compressed in terms of high-order entropies, as well as manage compressed permutations, compressed functions, and a compressed dynamic collection of disjoint sets, while supporting a rich functionality on those. 1 Introduction There has been a surge of interest recently in string data structures supporting access, rank and select queries. Given a string s, the query s.access(i) returns the ith character of s, which we denote s[i]; the query s.rank a (i) returns the number of occurrences of the character a up to position i; and the query s.select a (i) returns the position of the ith a in s. Researchers study these operations not only because they are interesting in themselves but also because they can be used as primitives to implement many other operations (see, e.g., [11,3,9,12] for recent discussions). Two of the most active areas of research on such data structures are, first, increasing the sizes of the alphabets they can handle and, second, decreasing their space bounds. Table 1 summarizes recent results in these two areas. Throughout, we write n to denote the length of the string s, σ to denote the alphabet size, log to denote log 2, and H k (s) to denote the kth-order empirical entropy of s (see, e.g., [4] for a definition and discussion). ( For example, ) Golynski, Munro and Rao [6] presented a data structure that stores s in n log σ + O nlog σ log log σ bits and supports access and rank in O (log log σ) time and select in O (1) time (see row 3 of Table 1); Ferragina, Manzini, Mäkinen and ( Navarro [4] presented ) a data structure called a multiary wavelet tree that stores s in nh 0 (s) + O n log σ log log n log n bits and supports access, rank ( ) and select in O 1 + log σ log log n time. When σ = log O(1) n, their space is nh 0 (s) + o(n) bits and their times are O (1) (see row 2 and the caption of Table 1). Comparing these results, we see that with Golynski et al. s data structure, we can handle large alphabets but we do not compress in terms of the usual entropy measures; with a multiary wavelet tree, the situation is reversed. The second and third authors were funded in part by the Millennium Institute for Cell Dynamics and Biotechnology (ICDB), Grant ICM P05-001-F, Mideplan, Chile.
Table 1. Recent and our new bounds for data structures supporting access, rank and select. The space bound in the first row holds when k = o(log σ n). In the second row the space formula holds for σ = o(n), and it becomes nh 0 (s) + o(n) when σ = log O(1) n. In the times for our results, σ can be changed to min(σ,n/occ (a,s)), where a is the character involved. space (bits) access rank select [1]+[5] nh k (s) + o(n) log σ + n o(log σ) O (1) O ( log log σ(log log log σ) 2) O (log log σ log log log σ) [4] nh 0(s) + o(n) log σ O ( ) 1 + log σ O ( ) 1 + log σ O ( ) 1 + log σ log log n log log n log log n [6] nlog σ + n o(log σ) O (log log σ) O (log log σ) O (1) [6] nlog σ + n o(log σ) O (1) O (log log σ log log log σ) O (log log σ) Ours nh 0(s) + o(n)(h 0(s) + 1) O (log log σ) O (log log σ) O (1) Ours nh 0(s) + o(n)(h 0(s) + 1) O (1) O (log log σ log log log σ) O (log log σ) In Section 2 we show how to combine the strengths of such a pair of data structures. Our idea is to partition the alphabet into sub-alphabets according to the characters frequencies in s, then use a multiary wavelet tree to store the string that results from replacing the characters in s by identifiers of their sub-alphabets, and store separate strings with the characters of s belonging to each subalphabet, this time using the structure for large alphabets. We achieve a data structure that stores a string s[1..n] in nh 0 (s)+o(n)(h 0 (s)+1) bits and supports queries in the times shown in Table 1 (rows 5 and 6 give two alternatives). In Section 3 we show how to achieve compression in terms of the kth-order empirical entropy H k (s) of s, by giving up or slowing down rank and select queries (this way giving a simpler construction to achieve row 1 in Table 1). We also show how our result can be used to improve an existing text index that achieves k-th order entropy [4]. In Sections 4, 5 and 6, respectively, we show how to apply our data structure to store a compressed permutation, a compressed function and a compressed dynamic collection of disjoint sets, while supporting a rich set of operations on those. This improves or gives alternatives to the best previous results [2,10,8]. 2 Alphabet partitioning Suppose s is a sequence over effective alphabet [σ], that is, every character appears in s, thus σ n. 1 The zero-order entropy of s is H 0 (s) = occ(a,s) n a [σ] n log occ(a,s), being occ(a,s) being the number of occurrences of character a in s. Note by convexity we have nh 0 (s) (σ 1)log n+(n σ + 1)log(n/(n σ + 1)), a property we will use later. Our results are based on the following alphabet partitioning scheme. Let t be the string in which each character s[i] is replaced by the number t[i] = log(n/occ (s[i],s))log n log 2 n. For 0 l log 2 n, let s l be the string consisting of those characters s[i] that were replaced by l in t, and let σ l be the number of distinct characters in s l. More precisely, s l will be a sequence over 1 The case of a general alphabet Σ can be handled by standard means, using a compressed bitvector [13] to map it to the effective range [1, σ]. This adds constant time to the operations and O ( ) σ log max Σ σ + o(max Σ) bits of space. 2
alphabet [1,σ l ]. The mapping with [1,σ] will be done by storing another sequence l[1,σ] so that l[a] will be the sub-alphabet number assigned to character a. Hence character a is mapped to character l.rank l[a] (a) in string s l[a], and symbol x [1,σ l ] in s l corresponds to character l.select l (x). Notice that, if both a and b are replaced by the same number in t, then log(n/occ (b,s)) log(n/occ (a,s)) < 1/log n and so occ (a,s) /occ (b,s) < 2 1/ log n. It follows that, if a is replaced by l in t, then σ l < 2 1/ log n s l /occ (a,s) (by fixing a and adding over all those b replaced by l). Since occ (a,s) = s l and occ (a,s) = s l = n, a l we have log(n/occ(a,s)) log n =l nh 0 (t) + l s l log σ l < l s l log(n/ s l ) + l log(n/occ(a,s)) log n =l ( ) occ(a,s)log 2 1/log n s l /occ (a,s) = a occ (a,s) log(n/occ (a,s)) + n/log n = nh 0 (s) + o(n). In other words, if we represent t with H 0 (t) bits per symbol and each s l with log σ l bits per symbol, then we achieve a good overall compression. Thus we can obtain a very compact representation of a string s by storing a compact representation of t and storing each s l as an uncompressed string over an alphabet of size σ l. Now we show how our approach can be used to obtain an fast and compact rank/select data structure. Suppose we have a data structure T that supports access, rank and select queries on t; another structure L that supports the same queries on l; and data structures S 1,...,S log 2 n that support the same queries on s 1,...,s log 2 n. With these data structures we can implement s.access(i) = l.select l (s l.access(t.rank l (i))), where l = t.access(i); s.rank a (i) = s l.rank c (t.rank l (i)), where l = l.access(a) and c = l.rank l (a); s.select a (i) = t.select l (s l.select c (i)) where l = l.access(a) and c = l.rank l (a). Assume we implement T and L as multiary wavelet trees [4], and implement each S l as either a multiary wavelet tree or an instance of Golynski et al. s [6] first access/rank/select data structure, depending on whether σ l log n or not. The wavelet tree for T uses at most nh 0 (t) + o(n) bits and operates in constant time, because its alphabet size is polylogarithmic. If S l is implemented as a wavelet tree, it uses at most s l H 0 (s l ) + o( s l ) ( bits and) operates in constant ( time for ) the same reason; otherwise it uses at most s l log σ l + O sl log σ l log log σ l s l log σ l + O sl log σ l log log log n bits (the latter because σ l > log n). Thus in all cases the space for s l is bounded by s l log σ l + o( s l log σ l ) bits. 2 Finally, since L is a sequence of length σ over an alphabet of size log 2 n, the wavelet tree for L takes at most O (σ log log n) bits. Because of the property we reminded in the beginning of 2 We note that this o( ) expression is in all cases asymptotic in n: in the case of multiary wavelet trees, it is achieved by using block sizes of length log n and not log s l, at the price of storing universal tables of size O ( 2 2 nlog O(1) n ). 3
this section, nh 0 (s) (σ 1)log n, this space is also o(nh 0 (s)). By these calculations, the space for T, L and the S l s adds up to nh 0 (s) + o(nh 0 (s)) + o(n). Depending on which time tradeoff we use for Golynski et al. s data structure, we obtain the results of Table 1. We can refine the time complexity by noticing that the only non-constant times are due to operating on some string s l, where the alphabet is of size σ l < 2 1/ log n s l /occ (a,s), where a is the character in question. Thus the actual times are, for example, O (log log σ l ) = O (log log min(σ,n/occ (a,s))). Theorem 1. We can store s[1,n] over effective alphabet [1,σ] in nh 0 (s) + o(n)(h 0 (s) + 1) bits and support access, rank and select queries in O (log log σ), O (log log σ), and O (1) time, respectively (variant (i)). Alternatively, we can support access, rank and select queries in O (1), O (log log σ log log log σ) and O (log log σ) time, respectively (variant (ii)). All the σ terms in the time complexities are actually min(σ,n/occ (a,s)), where a = s[i] for access, and a is the character argument for rank and select. If [σ] is not the effective alphabet, our structure handles it gracefully with the same structure L, using O (σ log log n) extra bits. 3 Higher-order entropies If we are willing to give up support of rank and select queries, then we can compress s well in terms of nh k (s). We note this result is not new: it was first proven by Sadakane and Grossi [14], simplified by González and Navarro [7] and then further simplified by Ferragina and Venturini [5]. The next theorem can be seen as yet a further simplification. Theorem 2. We can store s in nh k (s) + o(n)log σ bits for all k = o(log σ n) and perform access queries in O (1) time (more than that, retrieving any O (log σ n) contiguous symbols within that time). 3 Proof. We divide s into blocks of length b = log σ n 2 and assign new characters to the distinct blocks. There are at most σ b = n 1/2 ( new characters ) and ( we build ) a table that maps them to their blocks in O (1) time, which takes O n 1/2 blog σ = O n 1/2 log n bits. We build a new string s by replacing each block of s by its assigned new character and store s using Theorem 1(ii). Ferragina and Venturini [5] showed s H 0 (s ) nh k (s) + O ((n/b)k log σ) for k b, so for k = o(log σ n) we use a total of at most nh k (s) + o(n)log σ bits. To compute s[i], we find s [ i/b ] and report the (i mod b)th character of the associated block. This can be easily extended to output any O (log σ n) contiguous symbols in constant time. Barbay, He, Munro and Rao [1] showed how, given a data structure that supports only access queries, it is possible to build a succinct index supporting rank and select. For example, building a succinct index on top of Ferragina and Venturini s data structure whose size is bounded in terms of H k (s) gives them the bounds shown in the first row of Table 1. The same applies to our simplified result, of course. 3 Note that in this case we do not need σ to be the effective alphabet: In order to achieve any k > 0, we need (at the very least) that σ = o(n), and thus the extra space for our structure L is O (σ log log n) = o(σ log n) = o(n log σ), already considered in the space formula. 4
Alternatively, we can achieve k-th order entropy by partitioning the Burrows-Wheeler transform of the sequence and encoding each partition to zero-order entropy [4]. This representation, however, is more useful for self-indexing than for supporting access, rank, and select on the sequence. Selfindexes also represent a sequence, but they support other operations related to text searching. By using Theorem 1(i) to represent the partitions of Ferragina et al. [4], on which we need to carry out access and rank, we achieve the following result, improving previous ones [4,6]. Theorem 3. Let t[1,n] be a text string over alphabet [1,σ], σ = o(n). 4 Then we can represent s using nh k (s)+o(n)log σ bits of space, for any k α log σ n and constant 0 < α < 1. The following operations can be carried out: (i) count the number of occurrences of a pattern p[1,m] in t, in time O (m log log σ); (ii) locate any such occurrence in time O (log σ n log log n log log σ); (iii) extract t[l,r] in time O ((r l + log σ n log log n)log log σ). For this particular locating time we are sampling one out of log σ n log log n text positions. 4 Compressing permutations We now show how to use access/rank/select data structures to store a compressed permutation. We follow Barbay and Navarro s notation [2] and improve their space and, especially, time performance. They measure the compressibility of a permutation π in terms of the entropy of the distribution of the lengths of runs of different kinds. Let π be covered by ρ runs (of some sort) of lengths runs(π) = n 1,...,n ρ. Then H(runs(π)) = n i n log n n i log ρ is called the entropy of the runs (and, because n i 1, it also holds nh(runs(π)) (ρ 1)log n). We first give a result for the most general class of runs considered in there [2] (i.e., interleaved sequences of increasing or decreasing values) and then give specialized results for less general runs. We start by considering the application of the permutation π(i) and its inverse, π (i), and focus later on iterated applications of these. Theorem 4. Suppose π is a permutation on n elements that consists of ρ interleaved increasing or decreasing runs. We can store π in 2nH(runs(π))+o(n)(H(runs(π))+1) bits and perform π and π queries in O (log log ρ) time. Proof. We first replace all the elements of the rth run by r, for 1 r ρ. Let s be the resulting string and let s be s permuted according to π. We store s and s using Theorem 1(i) and store ρ bits indicating whether each run is increasing or decreasing. Notice s [π(i)] = s[i] and, if π(i) is part of an increasing run, then s.rank s[i] (π(i)) = s.rank s[i] (i), so ) π(i) = s.select s[i] (s.rank s[i] (i) ; if π(i) is part of a decreasing run, then s.rank s[i] (π(i)) = s.rank s[i] (n) + 1 s.rank s[i] (i), so ) π(i) = s.select s[i] (s.rank s[i] (n) + 1 s.rank s[i] (i). A π query is symmetric. The space of the bitmap is ρ = o(nh(runs(π))) because nh(runs(π)) (ρ 1)log n. 4 Again, [σ] does not need to be the effective alphabet. 5
We now consider the case of runs restricted to be strictly incrementing (+1) or decrementing ( 1), while still letting them be interleaved. Theorem 5. Suppose π is a permutation on n elements that consists of ρ interleaved incrementing or decrementing runs. For any constant ǫ > 0, we can store π in nh(runs(π)) + o(n)(h(runs(π)) + 1) + O (ρn ǫ ) bits and perform π queries in O (log log ρ) time and π queries in O (1/ǫ) time. Proof. We first replace all the elements of the rth run by r, for 1 r ρ, considering the runs in order by minimum element. Let s {1,...,ρ} n be the resulting string. We store s using Theorem 1(i); we also store an array containing the runs lengths, directions (incrementing or decrementing), and minima, in order by minimum element; and we store a predecessor data structure containing the runs minima as keys with their positions in the array as auxiliary information. The predecessor data structure, which we will describe in the full version of this paper, takes O (ρn ǫ ) bits and answers queries in O (1/ǫ) time. With the array and the predecessor data structure, we can retrieve a run s data given either its array index or any of its elements. If π(i) is the jth element in an incrementing run whose minimum element is m, then π(i) = m + j 1; on the other hand, if π(i) is the jth element of a decrementing run of length l whose minimum element is m, them π(i) = m+l j. It follows that, given i, we can compute π(i) by using the query j = s.rank s[i] (i) and then an array lookup at position s[i] to find m, l and the direction, finally computing π(i) from them. Also, given π(i), we can compute i by first using a predecessor query to find the run s array position r, then an array lookup to find m, l and the direction, then computing j = π(i) m + 1 (increasing) or j = m + l π(i) (decreasing), and finally using the query i = s.select r (j). Notice that, if π consists of ρ contiguous increasing or decreasing runs, then π consists of ρ interleaved incrementing or decrementing runs. Therefore, Theorem 5 applies to such permutations as well, with the time bounds for π and π queries reversed. Theorem 6. Suppose π is a permutation on n elements that consists of ρ contiguous increasing or decreasing runs. For any constant ǫ > 0, we can store π in nh(runs(π)) + o(n)(h(runs(π)) + 1) + O (ρn ǫ ) bits and perform π queries in O (1/ǫ) time and π queries in O (log log ρ) time. If π s runs are both contiguous and incrementing or decrementing so π s runs are, also then we can store π in O (ρn ǫ ) bits and answer π and π queries in O (1) time. To do this, we use two predecessor data structures: for each run, in one of the data structures we store the position j in π of the first element of the run, with π(j) as auxiliary information; in the other, we store π(j), with j as auxiliary information. To perform a query π(i), we use the first predecessor data structure to find the starting position j of the run containing i, and return π(j)+i j. A π query is symmetric. Decreasing runs are handled as before. Theorem 7. Suppose π is a permutation on n elements that consists of ρ contiguous incrementing or decrementing runs. For any constant ǫ > 0, we can store π in O (ρn ǫ ) bits and perform π and π queries in O (1/ǫ) time. We now prove a novel result achieving exponentiation (π k (i), π k (i)) within compressed space. The previous result by Munro, Raman, Raman and Rao [10] translated the problem to π and π queries on a different permutation. If one applies directly our results to the permutation they store, the runs are not those of the original π. The following construction, instead, retains the compressibility properties of π. 6
Theorem 8. Suppose we have a data structure D that stores a permutation π on n elements and supports queries π(i) in time g(π). Then for any t n, we can build a companion data structure that takes O ((n/t)log n) bits and, when used in conjunction with D, supports π k and π k queries in O (t g(π)) time. Proof. We decompose π into its cycles and, for every cycle of length at least t, store the cycle s length and an array containing pointers to every tth element in the cycle, which we call marked. We also store a compressed binary string, aligned to π, indicating the marked elements. For each marked element, we record to which cycle it belongs and its position in the array of that cycle. To compute π k (i), we repeatedly apply π at most t times until we either loop (in which case we need apply π at most t more times to find π k (i) in the loop) or we find a marked element. Once we have reached a marked element, we use its array position and cycle length to find the pointer to the last marked element in the cycle before π k (i), and the number of applications of π needed to map that to π k (i) (at most t). A π k query is similar (note it does not need to use π ). 5 Compressing functions Hreinsson, Krøyer and Pagh [8] recently showed how to store a compressed function f : [n] [σ] with constant-time access. To do this, they store a prefix-free encoding of the string f = f(1),...,f(n) of function values in such a way that, given i, they can find and decode the ith codeword in constant time. Their representation occupies at most (1 + δ)nh 0 (f) + n min(p max + 0.086,1.82(1 p max ))+o(σ) bits, where δ > 0 is a given constant and p max is the relative frequency of the most common function value. Notice that, by regarding f as a string, we can achieve constanttime access and a better space bounds using either Theorems 1 or 2. With Theorem 1 we can also find all the elements in [n] that f maps to a given element in [σ] (using select), find an element s rank among the elements with the same image, or the size of the preimage (using rank), etc. Theorem 9. Let f : [n] [σ] be a surjective function. 5 We can represent f using nh 0 (f) + o(n)(h 0 (f) + 1) bits so that any f(i) can be computed in O (1) time. Moreover, each element of f 1 (a) can be computed in O (log log σ) time, and f 1 (a) requires time O (log log σ log log log σ). Alternatively we can compute f(i) and f 1 (a) in time O (log log σ) and deliver any element of f 1 (a) in O (1) time. We can also achieve interesting results with our theorems from Section 4, as runs arise naturally in many real-life functions. For example, suppose we decompose f(1),...,f(n) into ρ interleaved non-increasing or non-decreasing runs. Then we can store it as a combination of the permutation π that stably sorts the values f(i), plus a compressed rank/select data structure storing a binary string b[1,n + σ + 1] with σ + 1 bits set to 1: if f maps i values in [n] to a value j in [σ] then, in b, there are i bits set to 0 between the jth and (j + 1)th bits set to 1. Therefore, f(i) = b.rank 1 (b.select 0 (π(i))) and the theorem below follows immediately from Theorem 4. Similarly, f 1 (a) is obtained by applying π to the area b.rank 0 (b.select 1 (a))+1... b.rank 0 (b.select 1 (a+1)), and f 1 (a) is computed in O (1) time. Notice H(runs(π)) = H(runs(f)) H 0 (f), and that b can be stored in O ( σ log n σ) + o(n) bits [13]. 5 So that [σ] is the effective alphabet size of string f. General functions with image of size σ < σ require O (σ log(σ/σ )) + o(σ) extra bits, or we can handle them using O (σ log log n) bits with our structure L. 7
Theorem 10. Suppose f : [n] [σ] is a surjective function 6 with f(1),...,f(n) consisting of ρ interleaved non-increasing or non-decreasing runs. Then we can store f in 2nH(runs(f)) + o(n)(h(runs(f)) + 1) + O ( σ log n σ) bits and compute any f(i), as well as retrieve any element in f 1 (a), in O (log log ρ) time. The size f 1 (a) can be computed in O (1) time. We can obtain a more competitive result if f is split into contiguous runs, but their entropy is not anymore bounded by the zero-order entropy of string f. Theorem 11. Suppose f : [n] [σ] is a surjective function with f(1),...,f(n) consisting of ρ contiguous non-increasing or non-decreasing runs. Then we can represent f in nh(runs(f)) + o(n)(h(runs(f)) + 1) + O (ρn ǫ ) + O ( σ log n σ) bits, for any constant ǫ > 0, and compute any f(i) in O (log log σ) time, as well as retrieve any element in f 1 (a) in O (1/ǫ) time. The size f 1 (a) can be computed in O (1) time. 6 Compressing dynamic disjoint sets Finally, we now prove what is, to the best of our knowledge, the first result about storing a compressed collection of disjoint sets. The key point in the next theorem is that, as the sets in the collection C are unioned, our space bound shrinks with the entropy of the distribution sets(c) of elements to sets. Theorem 12. Suppose C is a collection of disjoint sets whose union is {1,...,n}. For any constant ǫ > 0, we can store C in (1+ǫ)nH(sets(C))+O ( C log n)+o(n)(h(sets(c)+1)) bits and perform any sequence of m union and find operations in a total of O ((1/ǫ)(m + n) log log n) time. Proof. We first choose an arbitrary order for the sets and use Theorem 1(ii) to store the string s[1..n] in which each s[i] is the identifier of the set containing i. We then choose an arbitrary representative for each set and store the representatives in both an array and a standard disjoint-set data structure [15]. Together, our data structures take nh(sets(c)) +O ( C log n) +o(n)(h(sets(c) +1)) bits. We can perform a query find(i) on C by performing find(s[i]) on the representatives, and perform a union(i,j) operation on C by just performing the corresponding operation on the representatives. In order for our data structure to shrink as we union the sets, we keep track of H(sets(C)) and, whenever it shrinks by a factor of 1 + ǫ, we rebuild our entire data structure; we will show in the full version of this paper that this takes O (n) time. Since H(sets(C)) is always less than log n, we need to rebuild only O ( log 1+ǫ log n ) = O ((1/ǫ)log log n) times. Notice we can stop rebuilding once nh(sets(c)) = o(n) and the space bound becomes dominated by the o(n)(h(sets(c)) + 1) term. References 1. J. Barbay, M. He, J. I. Munro, and S. S. Rao. Succinct indexes for strings, binary relations and multi-labeled trees. In Proceedings of the 18th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 680 689, 2007. 2. J. Barbay and G. Navarro. Compressed representations of permutations, and applications. In Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 111 122, 2009. 3. F. Claude and G. Navarro. Practical rank/select queries over arbitrary sequences. In Proceedings of the 15th Symposium on String Processing and Information Retrieval, pages 176 187, 2008. 6 Otherwise we proceed as usual to map the domain to the effective one. 8
4. P. Ferragina, G. Manzini, V. Mäkinen, and G. Navarro. Compressed representations of sequences and full-text indexes. ACM Transactions on Algorithms, 3(2), 2007. 5. P. Ferragina and R. Venturini. A simple storage scheme for strings achieving entropy bounds. Theoretical Computer Science, 372(1):115 121, 2007. 6. A. Golynski, J. I. Munro, and S. S. Rao. Rank/select operations on large alphabets: a tool for text indexing. In Proceedings of the 17th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 368 373, 2006. 7. R. González and G. Navarro. Statistical encoding of succinct data structures. In Proceedings of the 17th Symposium on Combinatorial Pattern Matching, pages 294 305, 2006. 8. J. B. Hreinsson, M. Krøyer, and R. Pagh. Storing a compressed function with constant time access. In Proceedings of the 17th European Symposium on Algorithms, pages 730 741, 2009. 9. V. Mäkinen and G. Navarro. Rank and select revisited and extended. Theoretical Computer Science, 387(3):332 347, 2007. 10. J. I. Munro, R. Raman, V. Raman, and S. S. Rao. Succinct representations of permuations. In Proceedings of the 30th International Colloquium on Algorithms, Languages and Programming, pages 345 356, 2003. 11. G. Navarro and V. Mäkinen. Compressed full-text indexes. ACM Computing Surveys, 39(1):article 2, 2007. 12. N. Rahman and R. Raman. Rank and select operations on binary strings. In M.-Y. Kao, editor, Encyclopedia of Algorithms. Springer, 2008. 13. R. Raman, V. Raman, and S. Rao. Succinct indexable dictionaries with applications to encoding k-ary trees and multisets. In Proc. 13th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 233 242, 2002. 14. K. Sadakane and R. Grossi. Squeezing succinct data structures into entropy bounds. In Proceedings of the 17th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 1230 1239, 2006. 15. R. E. Tarjan and J. van Leeuwen. Worst-case analysis of set union algorithms. Journal of the ACM, 31(2):245 281, 1984. 9