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

Translation from Classical Two-Way Automata to Pebble Two-Way Automata

We study the relation between the standard two-way automata and more powerful devices, namely, two-way finite automata with an additional "pebble" movable along the input tape. Similarly as in the case of the classical two-way machines, it is not known whether there exists a polynomial trade-off, in the number of states, between the nondeterministic and deterministic pebble two-way automata. However, we show that these two machine models are not independent: if there exists a polynomial trade-off for the classical two-way automata, then there must also exist a polynomial trade-off for the pebble two-way automata. Thus, we have an upward collapse (or a downward separation) from the classical two-way automata to more powerful pebble automata, still staying within the class of regular languages. The same upward collapse holds for complementation of nondeterministic two-way machines. These results are obtained by showing that each pebble machine can be, by using suitable inputs, simulated by a classical two-way automaton with a linear number of states (and vice versa), despite the existing exponential blow-up between the classical and pebble two-way machines

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

Implications of quantum automata for contextuality

We construct zero-error quantum finite automata (QFAs) for promise problems which cannot be solved by bounded-error probabilistic finite automata (PFAs). Here is a summary of our results: - There is a promise problem solvable by an exact two-way QFA in exponential expected time, but not by any bounded-error sublogarithmic space probabilistic Turing machine (PTM). - There is a promise problem solvable by an exact two-way QFA in quadratic expected time, but not by any bounded-error $o(\log \log n)$-space PTMs in polynomial expected time. The same problem can be solvable by a one-way Las Vegas (or exact two-way) QFA with quantum head in linear (expected) time. - There is a promise problem solvable by a Las Vegas realtime QFA, but not by any bounded-error realtime PFA. The same problem can be solvable by an exact two-way QFA in linear expected time but not by any exact two-way PFA. - There is a family of promise problems such that each promise problem can be solvable by a two-state exact realtime QFAs, but, there is no such bound on the number of states of realtime bounded-error PFAs solving the members this family. Our results imply that there exist zero-error quantum computational devices with a \emph{single qubit} of memory that cannot be simulated by any finite memory classical computational model. This provides a computational perspective on results regarding ontological theories of quantum mechanics \cite{Hardy04}, \cite{Montina08}. As a consequence we find that classical automata based simulation models \cite{Kleinmann11}, \cite{Blasiak13} are not sufficiently powerful to simulate quantum contextuality. We conclude by highlighting the interplay between results from automata models and their application to developing a general framework for quantum contextuality.Comment: 22 page

Two-Way Automata Making Choices Only at the Endmarkers

The question of the state-size cost for simulation of two-way nondeterministic automata (2NFAs) by two-way deterministic automata (2DFAs) was raised in 1978 and, despite many attempts, it is still open. Subsequently, the problem was attacked by restricting the power of 2DFAs (e.g., using a restricted input head movement) to the degree for which it was already possible to derive some exponential gaps between the weaker model and the standard 2NFAs. Here we use an opposite approach, increasing the power of 2DFAs to the degree for which it is still possible to obtain a subexponential conversion from the stronger model to the standard 2DFAs. In particular, it turns out that subexponential conversion is possible for two-way automata that make nondeterministic choices only when the input head scans one of the input tape endmarkers. However, there is no restriction on the input head movement. This implies that an exponential gap between 2NFAs and 2DFAs can be obtained only for unrestricted 2NFAs using capabilities beyond the proposed new model. As an additional bonus, conversion into a machine for the complement of the original language is polynomial in this model. The same holds for making such machines self-verifying, halting, or unambiguous. Finally, any superpolynomial lower bound for the simulation of such machines by standard 2DFAs would imply LNL. In the same way, the alternating version of these machines is related to L =? NL =? P, the classical computational complexity problems.Comment: 23 page

Sweeping Permutation Automata

This paper introduces sweeping permutation automata, which move over an input string in alternating left-to-right and right-to-left sweeps and have a bijective transition function. It is proved that these automata recognize the same family of languages as the classical one-way permutation automata (Thierrin, "Permutation automata", Mathematical Systems Theory, 1968). An n-state two-way permutation automaton is transformed to a one-way permutation automaton with F(n)=\max_(k+l=n, m <= l) k (l \choose m) (k - 1 \choose l - m) (l - m)! states. This number of states is proved to be necessary in the worst case, and its growth rate is estimated as F(n) = n^(n/2 - (1 + \ln 2)/2 \cdot n/(\ln n) \cdot (1 + o(1))).Comment: In Proceedings NCMA 2023, arXiv:2309.0733

Deterministic blow-ups of minimal NFA\u27s

The paper treats the question whether there always exists a minimal nondeterministic finite automaton of n states whose equivalent minimal deterministic finite automaton has α states for any integers n and α with n ≤ α ≤ 2n. Partial answers to this question were given by Iwama, Kambayashi, and Takaki (2000) and by Iwama, Matsuura, and Paterson (2003). In the present paper, the question is completely solved by presenting appropriate automata for all values of n and α. However, in order to give an explicit construction of the automata, we increase the input alphabet to exponential sizes. Then we prove that 2n letters would be sufficient but we describe the related automata only implicitly. In the last section, we investigate the above question for automata over binary and unary alphabets

Lower Bounds for Graph-Walking Automata

Graph-walking automata (GWA) traverse graphs by moving between the nodes following the edges, using a finite-state control to decide where to go next. It is known that every GWA can be transformed to a GWA that halts on every input, to a GWA returning to the initial node in order to accept, as well as to a reversible GWA. This paper establishes lower bounds on the state blow-up of these transformations: it is shown that making an n-state GWA traversing k-ary graphs return to the initial node requires at least 2(n-1)(k-3) states in the worst case; the same lower bound holds for the transformation to halting automata. Automata satisfying both properties at once must have at least 4(n-1)(k-3) states. A reversible automaton must have at least 4(n-1)(k-3)-1 states. These bounds are asymptotically tight to the upper bounds proved using the methods from the literature