1,507 research outputs found
Visibly Pushdown Modular Games
Games on recursive game graphs can be used to reason about the control flow
of sequential programs with recursion. In games over recursive game graphs, the
most natural notion of strategy is the modular strategy, i.e., a strategy that
is local to a module and is oblivious to previous module invocations, and thus
does not depend on the context of invocation. In this work, we study for the
first time modular strategies with respect to winning conditions that can be
expressed by a pushdown automaton.
We show that such games are undecidable in general, and become decidable for
visibly pushdown automata specifications.
Our solution relies on a reduction to modular games with finite-state
automata winning conditions, which are known in the literature.
We carefully characterize the computational complexity of the considered
decision problem. In particular, we show that modular games with a universal
Buchi or co Buchi visibly pushdown winning condition are EXPTIME-complete, and
when the winning condition is given by a CARET or NWTL temporal logic formula
the problem is 2EXPTIME-complete, and it remains 2EXPTIME-hard even for simple
fragments of these logics.
As a further contribution, we present a different solution for modular games
with finite-state automata winning condition that runs faster than known
solutions for large specifications and many exits.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2014, arXiv:1408.556
Decision Problems for Deterministic Pushdown Automata on Infinite Words
The article surveys some decidability results for DPDAs on infinite words
(omega-DPDA). We summarize some recent results on the decidability of the
regularity and the equivalence problem for the class of weak omega-DPDAs.
Furthermore, we present some new results on the parity index problem for
omega-DPDAs. For the specification of a parity condition, the states of the
omega-DPDA are assigned priorities (natural numbers), and a run is accepting if
the highest priority that appears infinitely often during a run is even. The
basic simplification question asks whether one can determine the minimal number
of priorities that are needed to accept the language of a given omega-DPDA. We
provide some decidability results on variations of this question for some
classes of omega-DPDAs.Comment: In Proceedings AFL 2014, arXiv:1405.527
On the Expressive Power of 2-Stack Visibly Pushdown Automata
Visibly pushdown automata are input-driven pushdown automata that recognize
some non-regular context-free languages while preserving the nice closure and
decidability properties of finite automata. Visibly pushdown automata with
multiple stacks have been considered recently by La Torre, Madhusudan, and
Parlato, who exploit the concept of visibility further to obtain a rich
automata class that can even express properties beyond the class of
context-free languages. At the same time, their automata are closed under
boolean operations, have a decidable emptiness and inclusion problem, and enjoy
a logical characterization in terms of a monadic second-order logic over words
with an additional nesting structure. These results require a restricted
version of visibly pushdown automata with multiple stacks whose behavior can be
split up into a fixed number of phases. In this paper, we consider 2-stack
visibly pushdown automata (i.e., visibly pushdown automata with two stacks) in
their unrestricted form. We show that they are expressively equivalent to the
existential fragment of monadic second-order logic. Furthermore, it turns out
that monadic second-order quantifier alternation forms an infinite hierarchy
wrt words with multiple nestings. Combining these results, we conclude that
2-stack visibly pushdown automata are not closed under complementation.
Finally, we discuss the expressive power of B\"{u}chi 2-stack visibly pushdown
automata running on infinite (nested) words. Extending the logic by an infinity
quantifier, we can likewise establish equivalence to existential monadic
second-order logic
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 visits, for a fixed constant .
Furthermore, for 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
Highly Undecidable Problems For Infinite Computations
We show that many classical decision problems about 1-counter
omega-languages, context free omega-languages, or infinitary rational
relations, are -complete, hence located at the second level of the
analytical hierarchy, and "highly undecidable". In particular, the universality
problem, the inclusion problem, the equivalence problem, the determinizability
problem, the complementability problem, and the unambiguity problem are all
-complete for context-free omega-languages or for infinitary rational
relations. Topological and arithmetical properties of 1-counter
omega-languages, context free omega-languages, or infinitary rational
relations, are also highly undecidable. These very surprising results provide
the first examples of highly undecidable problems about the behaviour of very
simple finite machines like 1-counter automata or 2-tape automata.Comment: to appear in RAIRO-Theoretical Informatics and Application
Input-Driven Tissue P Automata
We introduce several variants of input-driven tissue P automata where the
rules to be applied only depend on the input symbol. Both strings and multisets are
considered as input objects; the strings are either read from an input tape or defined
by the sequence of symbols taken in, and the multisets are given in an input cell at the
beginning of a computation, enclosed in a vesicle. Additional symbols generated during a
computation are stored in this vesicle, too. An input is accepted when the vesicle reaches a
final cell and it is empty. The computational power of some variants of input-driven tissue
P automata is illustrated by examples and compared with the power of the input-driven
variants of other automata as register machines and counter automata
- …