Skip to main content
. 2010 Dec 14;11(Suppl 11):S8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-11-S11-S8

Table 3 .

Effects of (l, d) on execution time.

(l, d): p Algorithm

DPC-FG PMS-Prune iTr-iplet Rec-Motif
(12, 3): 0.054 0.825 1.63 173.6 0.630
(15, 4): 0.057 0.673 5.22 189.2 0.703
(18, 5): 0.057 0.596 16.9 230.4 0.700
(21, 6): 0.056 0.532 46.5 250.0 0.677
(24, 7): 0.055 0.475 80.2 291.5 0.585
(27, 8): 0.053 0.432 137.1 354.4 0.633
(30, 9): 0.051 0.394 242.9 443.6 0.629
(33, 10): 0.048 0.365 405.2 553.8 0.556
(36, 11): 0.046 0.329 651.8 1419 0.484
(39, 12): 0.044 0.311 1056 2779 0.500
(42, 13): 0.042 0.286 1842 2895 0.483
(44, 14): 0.063 0.674 -o -e 0.971
(47, 15): 0.059 0.577 -o -e 0.921
(50, 16): 0.055 0.520 -o -e 0.832

This table shows how the execution times of algorithms, including PMSprune, iTriplet, DPCFG and RecMotif are influenced by the values of l and d with approximately fixed p.

*note, -o: over 5 hours; -e: error on memory allocation. Time unit: seconds