From Finite Automata to Regular Expressions and Back--A Summary on Descriptional Complexity

The equivalence of finite automata and regular expressions dates back to the seminal paper of Kleene on events in nerve nets and finite automata from 1956. In the present paper we tour a fragment of the literature and summarize results on upper and lower bounds on the conversion of finite automata to regular expressions and vice versa. We also briefly recall the known bounds for the removal of spontaneous transitions (epsilon-transitions) on non-epsilon-free nondeterministic devices. Moreover, we report on recent results on the average case descriptional complexity bounds for the conversion of regular expressions to finite automata and brand new developments on the state elimination algorithm that converts finite automata to regular expressions.Comment: In Proceedings AFL 2014, arXiv:1405.527

Multi-Head Finite Automata: Characterizations, Concepts and Open Problems

Multi-head finite automata were introduced in (Rabin, 1964) and (Rosenberg, 1966). Since that time, a vast literature on computational and descriptional complexity issues on multi-head finite automata documenting the importance of these devices has been developed. Although multi-head finite automata are a simple concept, their computational behavior can be already very complex and leads to undecidable or even non-semi-decidable problems on these devices such as, for example, emptiness, finiteness, universality, equivalence, etc. These strong negative results trigger the study of subclasses and alternative characterizations of multi-head finite automata for a better understanding of the nature of non-recursive trade-offs and, thus, the borderline between decidable and undecidable problems. In the present paper, we tour a fragment of this literature

One-Tape Turing Machine Variants and Language Recognition

We present two restricted versions of one-tape Turing machines. Both characterize the class of context-free languages. In the first version, proposed by Hibbard in 1967 and called limited automata, each tape cell can be rewritten only in the first $d$ visits, for a fixed constant $d\geq 2$. Furthermore, for $d=2$ deterministic limited automata are equivalent to deterministic pushdown automata, namely they characterize deterministic context-free languages. Further restricting the possible operations, we consider strongly limited automata. These models still characterize context-free languages. However, the deterministic version is less powerful than the deterministic version of limited automata. In fact, there exist deterministic context-free languages that are not accepted by any deterministic strongly limited automaton.Comment: 20 pages. This article will appear in the Complexity Theory Column of the September 2015 issue of SIGACT New

On Measuring Non-Recursive Trade-Offs

We investigate the phenomenon of non-recursive trade-offs between descriptional systems in an abstract fashion. We aim at categorizing non-recursive trade-offs by bounds on their growth rate, and show how to deduce such bounds in general. We also identify criteria which, in the spirit of abstract language theory, allow us to deduce non-recursive tradeoffs from effective closure properties of language families on the one hand, and differences in the decidability status of basic decision problems on the other. We develop a qualitative classification of non-recursive trade-offs in order to obtain a better understanding of this very fundamental behaviour of descriptional systems

On one-way cellular automata with a fixed number of cells

We investigate a restricted one-way cellular automaton (OCA) model where the number of cells is bounded by a constant number k, so-called kC-OCAs. In contrast to the general model, the generative capacity of the restricted model is reduced to the set of regular languages. A kC-OCA can be algorithmically converted to a deterministic finite automaton (DFA). The blow-up in the number of states is bounded by a polynomial of degree k. We can exhibit a family of unary languages which shows that this upper bound is tight in order of magnitude. We then study upper and lower bounds for the trade-off when converting DFAs to kC-OCAs. We show that there are regular languages where the use of kC-OCAs cannot reduce the number of states when compared to DFAs. We then investigate trade-offs between kC-OCAs with different numbers of cells and finally treat the problem of minimizing a given kC-OCA

The Magic Number Problem for Subregular Language Families

We investigate the magic number problem, that is, the question whether there exists a minimal n-state nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) whose equivalent minimal deterministic finite automaton (DFA) has alpha states, for all n and alpha satisfying n less or equal to alpha less or equal to exp(2,n). A number alpha not satisfying this condition is called a magic number (for n). It was shown in [11] that no magic numbers exist for general regular languages, while in [5] trivial and non-trivial magic numbers for unary regular languages were identified. We obtain similar results for automata accepting subregular languages like, for example, combinational languages, star-free, prefix-, suffix-, and infix-closed languages, and prefix-, suffix-, and infix-free languages, showing that there are only trivial magic numbers, when they exist. For finite languages we obtain some partial results showing that certain numbers are non-magic.Comment: In Proceedings DCFS 2010, arXiv:1008.127

On non-recursive trade-offs between finite-turn pushdown automata

It is shown that between one-turn pushdown automata (1-turn PDAs) and deterministic finite automata (DFAs) there will be savings concerning the size of description not bounded by any recursive function, so-called non-recursive tradeoffs. Considering the number of turns of the stack height as a consumable resource of PDAs, we can show the existence of non-recursive trade-offs between PDAs performing k+ 1 turns and k turns for k >= 1. Furthermore, non-recursive trade-offs are shown between arbitrary PDAs and PDAs which perform only a finite number of turns. Finally, several decidability questions are shown to be undecidable and not semidecidable

Operational State Complexity of Deterministic Unranked Tree Automata

We consider the state complexity of basic operations on tree languages recognized by deterministic unranked tree automata. For the operations of union and intersection the upper and lower bounds of both weakly and strongly deterministic tree automata are obtained. For tree concatenation we establish a tight upper bound that is of a different order than the known state complexity of concatenation of regular string languages. We show that (n+1) ( (m+1)2^n-2^(n-1) )-1 vertical states are sufficient, and necessary in the worst case, to recognize the concatenation of tree languages recognized by (strongly or weakly) deterministic automata with, respectively, m and n vertical states.Comment: In Proceedings DCFS 2010, arXiv:1008.127

Descriptional Complexity of Finite Automata -- Selected Highlights

The state complexity, respectively, nondeterministic state complexity of a regular language $L$ is the number of states of the minimal deterministic, respectively, of a minimal nondeterministic finite automaton for $L$. Some of the most studied state complexity questions deal with size comparisons of nondeterministic finite automata of differing degree of ambiguity. More generally, if for a regular language we compare the size of description by a finite automaton and by a more powerful language definition mechanism, such as a context-free grammar, we encounter non-recursive trade-offs. Operational state complexity studies the state complexity of the language resulting from a regularity preserving operation as a function of the complexity of the argument languages. Determining the state complexity of combined operations is generally challenging and for general combinations of operations that include intersection and marked concatenation it is uncomputable