13 research outputs found

    Potential of quantum finite automata with exact acceptance

    Full text link
    The potential of the exact quantum information processing is an interesting, important and intriguing issue. For examples, it has been believed that quantum tools can provide significant, that is larger than polynomial, advantages in the case of exact quantum computation only, or mainly, for problems with very special structures. We will show that this is not the case. In this paper the potential of quantum finite automata producing outcomes not only with a (high) probability, but with certainty (so called exactly) is explored in the context of their uses for solving promise problems and with respect to the size of automata. It is shown that for solving particular classes {An}n=1\{A^n\}_{n=1}^{\infty} of promise problems, even those without some very special structure, that succinctness of the exact quantum finite automata under consideration, with respect to the number of (basis) states, can be very small (and constant) though it grows proportional to nn in the case deterministic finite automata (DFAs) of the same power are used. This is here demonstrated also for the case that the component languages of the promise problems solvable by DFAs are non-regular. The method used can be applied in finding more exact quantum finite automata or quantum algorithms for other promise problems.Comment: We have improved the presentation of the paper. Accepted to International Journal of Foundation of Computer Scienc

    New results on classical and quantum counter automata

    Full text link
    We show that one-way quantum one-counter automaton with zero-error is more powerful than its probabilistic counterpart on promise problems. Then, we obtain a similar separation result between Las Vegas one-way probabilistic one-counter automaton and one-way deterministic one-counter automaton. We also obtain new results on classical counter automata regarding language recognition. It was conjectured that one-way probabilistic one blind-counter automata cannot recognize Kleene closure of equality language [A. Yakaryilmaz: Superiority of one-way and realtime quantum machines. RAIRO - Theor. Inf. and Applic. 46(4): 615-641 (2012)]. We show that this conjecture is false, and also show several separation results for blind/non-blind counter automata.Comment: 21 page

    State succinctness of two-way finite automata with quantum and classical states

    Full text link
    {\it Two-way quantum automata with quantum and classical states} (2QCFA) were introduced by Ambainis and Watrous in 2002. In this paper we study state succinctness of 2QCFA. For any mZ+m\in {\mathbb{Z}}^+ and any ϵ<1/2\epsilon<1/2, we show that: {enumerate} there is a promise problem Aeq(m)A^{eq}(m) which can be solved by a 2QCFA with one-sided error ϵ\epsilon in a polynomial expected running time with a constant number (that depends neither on mm nor on ε\varepsilon) of quantum states and O(log1ϵ)\mathbf{O}(\log{\frac{1}{\epsilon})} classical states, whereas the sizes of the corresponding {\it deterministic finite automata} (DFA), {\it two-way nondeterministic finite automata} (2NFA) and polynomial expected running time {\it two-way probabilistic finite automata} (2PFA) are at least 2m+22m+2, logm\sqrt{\log{m}}, and (logm)/b3\sqrt[3]{(\log m)/b}, respectively; there exists a language Ltwin(m)={wcww{a,b}}L^{twin}(m)=\{wcw| w\in\{a,b\}^*\} over the alphabet Σ={a,b,c}\Sigma=\{a,b,c\} which can be recognized by a 2QCFA with one-sided error ϵ\epsilon in an exponential expected running time with a constant number of quantum states and O(log1ϵ)\mathbf{O}(\log{\frac{1}{\epsilon})} classical states, whereas the sizes of the corresponding DFA, 2NFA and polynomial expected running time 2PFA are at least 2m2^m, m\sqrt{m}, and m/b3\sqrt[3]{m/b}, respectively; {enumerate} where bb is a constant.Comment: 26pages, comments and suggestions are welcom
    corecore