Quantum counter automata

The question of whether quantum real-time one-counter automata (rtQ1CAs) can outperform their probabilistic counterparts has been open for more than a decade. We provide an affirmative answer to this question, by demonstrating a non-context-free language that can be recognized with perfect soundness by a rtQ1CA. This is the first demonstration of the superiority of a quantum model to the corresponding classical one in the real-time case with an error bound less than 1. We also introduce a generalization of the rtQ1CA, the quantum one-way one-counter automaton (1Q1CA), and show that they too are superior to the corresponding family of probabilistic machines. For this purpose, we provide general definitions of these models that reflect the modern approach to the definition of quantum finite automata, and point out some problems with previous results. We identify several remaining open problems.Comment: A revised version. 16 pages. A preliminary version of this paper appeared as A. C. Cem Say, Abuzer Yakary{\i}lmaz, and \c{S}efika Y\"{u}zsever. Quantum one-way one-counter automata. In R\={u}si\c{n}\v{s} Freivalds, editor, Randomized and quantum computation, pages 25--34, 2010 (Satellite workshop of MFCS and CSL 2010

Lattice structures for bisimilar Probabilistic Automata

The paper shows that there is a deep structure on certain sets of bisimilar Probabilistic Automata (PA). The key prerequisite for these structures is a notion of compactness of PA. It is shown that compact bisimilar PA form lattices. These results are then used in order to establish normal forms not only for finite automata, but also for infinite automata, as long as they are compact.Comment: In Proceedings INFINITY 2013, arXiv:1402.661

Refinement for Probabilistic Systems with Nondeterminism

Before we combine actions and probabilities two very obvious questions should be asked. Firstly, what does "the probability of an action" mean? Secondly, how does probability interact with nondeterminism? Neither question has a single universally agreed upon answer but by considering these questions at the outset we build a novel and hopefully intuitive probabilistic event-based formalism. In previous work we have characterised refinement via the notion of testing. Basically, if one system passes all the tests that another system passes (and maybe more) we say the first system is a refinement of the second. This is, in our view, an important way of characterising refinement, via the question "what sort of refinement should I be using?" We use testing in this paper as the basis for our refinement. We develop tests for probabilistic systems by analogy with the tests developed for non-probabilistic systems. We make sure that our probabilistic tests, when performed on non-probabilistic automata, give us refinement relations which agree with for those non-probabilistic automata. We formalise this property as a vertical refinement.Comment: In Proceedings Refine 2011, arXiv:1106.348

Unbounded-error quantum computation with small space bounds

We prove the following facts about the language recognition power of quantum Turing machines (QTMs) in the unbounded error setting: QTMs are strictly more powerful than probabilistic Turing machines for any common space bound $s$ satisfying $s(n)=o(\log \log n)$. For "one-way" Turing machines, where the input tape head is not allowed to move left, the above result holds for $s(n)=o(\log n)$. We also give a characterization for the class of languages recognized with unbounded error by real-time quantum finite automata (QFAs) with restricted measurements. It turns out that these automata are equal in power to their probabilistic counterparts, and this fact does not change when the QFA model is augmented to allow general measurements and mixed states. Unlike the case with classical finite automata, when the QFA tape head is allowed to remain stationary in some steps, more languages become recognizable. We define and use a QTM model that generalizes the other variants introduced earlier in the study of quantum space complexity.Comment: A preliminary version of this paper appeared in the Proceedings of the Fourth International Computer Science Symposium in Russia, pages 356--367, 200

Finite state verifiers with constant randomness

We give a new characterization of $\mathsf{NL}$ as the class of languages whose members have certificates that can be verified with small error in polynomial time by finite state machines that use a constant number of random bits, as opposed to its conventional description in terms of deterministic logarithmic-space verifiers. It turns out that allowing two-way interaction with the prover does not change the class of verifiable languages, and that no polynomially bounded amount of randomness is useful for constant-memory computers when used as language recognizers, or public-coin verifiers. A corollary of our main result is that the class of outcome problems corresponding to O(log n)-space bounded games of incomplete information where the universal player is allowed a constant number of moves equals NL.Comment: 17 pages. An improved versio

Model-checking branching-time properties of probabilistic automata and probabilistic one-counter automata

This paper studies the problem of model-checking of probabilistic automaton and probabilistic one-counter automata against probabilistic branching-time temporal logics (PCTL and PCTL$^*$). We show that it is undecidable for these problems. We first show, by reducing to emptiness problem of probabilistic automata, that the model-checking of probabilistic finite automata against branching-time temporal logics are undecidable. And then, for each probabilistic automata, by constructing a probabilistic one-counter automaton with the same behavior as questioned probabilistic automata the undecidability of model-checking problems against branching-time temporal logics are derived, herein.Comment: Comments are welcom