|Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister|
the way we are doing it now is vastly better than the original algorithm by Ullmann we were using.
So, you are searching for subgraph isomorphisms?
If so, is it possible for you to describe what the graphs are and what you are looking for when comparing them, in terms of the underlying data rather than graph theory?
I ask because I've never yet encountered a real use for a graph theory algorithm that wasn't more efficiently coded by ignoring graph theory.
As with all theoretical algorithms; GT algorithms have to deal with, and work for, all possible graphs of the given type regardless of what data and data relationships they actually represent.
In every real-world case I remember, knowledge of the actual data and required results allowed me to make assumptions and take short cuts that the theorists cannot.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.