Automata Minimization: a Functorial Approach

In this paper we regard languages and their acceptors - such as deterministic or weighted automata, transducers, or monoids - as functors from input categories that specify the type of the languages and of the machines to categories that specify the type of outputs. Our results are as follows: A) We provide sufficient conditions on the output category so that minimization of the corresponding automata is guaranteed. B) We show how to lift adjunctions between the categories for output values to adjunctions between categories of automata. C) We show how this framework can be instantiated to unify several phenomena in automata theory, starting with determinization, minimization and syntactic algebras. We provide explanations of Choffrut's minimization algorithm for subsequential transducers and of Brzozowski's minimization algorithm in this setting.Comment: journal version of the CALCO 2017 paper arXiv:1711.0306

Minimizing finite automata is computationally hard

It is known that deterministic finite automata (DFAs) can be algorithmically minimized, i.e., a DFA M can be converted to an equivalent DFA M' which has a minimal number of states. The minimization can be done efficiently [6]. On the other hand, it is known that unambiguous finite automata (UFAs) and nondeterministic finite automata (NFAs) can be algorithmically minimized too, but their minimization problems turn out to be NP-complete and PSPACE-complete [8]. In this paper, the time complexity of the minimization problem for two restricted types of finite automata is investigated. These automata are nearly deterministic, since they only allow a small amount of non determinism to be used. On the one hand, NFAs with a fixed finite branching are studied, i.e., the number of nondeterministic moves within every accepting computation is bounded by a fixed finite number. On the other hand, finite automata are investigated which are essentially deterministic except that there is a fixed number of different initial states which can be chosen nondeterministically. The main result is that the minimization problems for these models are computationally hard, namely NP-complete. Hence, even the slightest extension of the deterministic model towards a nondeterministic one, e.g., allowing at most one nondeterministic move in every accepting computation or allowing two initial states instead of one, results in computationally intractable minimization problems

Hyper-Minimization for Deterministic Weighted Tree Automata

Hyper-minimization is a state reduction technique that allows a finite change in the semantics. The theory for hyper-minimization of deterministic weighted tree automata is provided. The presence of weights slightly complicates the situation in comparison to the unweighted case. In addition, the first hyper-minimization algorithm for deterministic weighted tree automata, weighted over commutative semifields, is provided together with some implementation remarks that enable an efficient implementation. In fact, the same run-time O(m log n) as in the unweighted case is obtained, where m is the size of the deterministic weighted tree automaton and n is its number of states.Comment: In Proceedings AFL 2014, arXiv:1405.527

Learn with SAT to Minimize B\"uchi Automata

We describe a minimization procedure for nondeterministic B\"uchi automata (NBA). For an automaton A another automaton A_min with the minimal number of states is learned with the help of a SAT-solver. This is done by successively computing automata A' that approximate A in the sense that they accept a given finite set of positive examples and reject a given finite set of negative examples. In the course of the procedure these example sets are successively increased. Thus, our method can be seen as an instance of a generic learning algorithm based on a "minimally adequate teacher" in the sense of Angluin. We use a SAT solver to find an NBA for given sets of positive and negative examples. We use complementation via construction of deterministic parity automata to check candidates computed in this manner for equivalence with A. Failure of equivalence yields new positive or negative examples. Our method proved successful on complete samplings of small automata and of quite some examples of bigger automata. We successfully ran the minimization on over ten thousand automata with mostly up to ten states, including the complements of all possible automata with two states and alphabet size three and discuss results and runtimes; single examples had over 100 states.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2012, arXiv:1210.202

Descriptional complexity of cellular automata and decidability questions

We study the descriptional complexity of cellular automata (CA), a parallel model of computation. We show that between one of the simplest cellular models, the realtime-OCA. and "classical" models like deterministic finite automata (DFA) or pushdown automata (PDA), there will be savings concerning the size of description not bounded by any recursive function, a so-called nonrecursive trade-off. Furthermore, nonrecursive trade-offs are shown between some restricted classes of cellular automata. The set of valid computations of a Turing machine can be recognized by a realtime-OCA. This implies that many decidability questions are not even semi decidable for cellular automata. There is no pumping lemma and no minimization algorithm for cellular automata