Complexity of Left-Ideal, Suffix-Closed and Suffix-Free Regular Languages

A language $L$ over an alphabet $\Sigma$ is suffix-convex if, for any words $x,y,z\in\Sigma^*$, whenever $z$ and $xyz$ are in $L$, then so is $yz$. Suffix-convex languages include three special cases: left-ideal, suffix-closed, and suffix-free languages. We examine complexity properties of these three special classes of suffix-convex regular languages. In particular, we study the quotient/state complexity of boolean operations, product (concatenation), star, and reversal on these languages, as well as the size of their syntactic semigroups, and the quotient complexity of their atoms.Comment: 20 pages, 11 figures, 1 table. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1605.0669

Quotient Complexity Of Star-Free Languages

Electronic version of an article published as International Journal of Foundations of Computer Science, 23(06), 2012, 1261–1276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0129054112400515 © World Scientific Publishing Company http://www.worldscientific.com/The quotient complexity, also known as state complexity, of a regular language is the number of distinct left quotients of the language. The quotient complexity of an operation is the maximal quotient complexity of the language resulting from the operation, as a function of the quotient complexities of the operands. The class of star free languages is the smallest class containing the finite languages and closed under boolean operations and concatenation. We prove that the tight bounds on the quotient complexities of union, intersection, difference, symmetric difference, concatenation and star for star-free languages are the same as those for regular languages, with some small exceptions, whereas 2(n) - 1 is a lower bound for reversal.Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [OGP0000871

Quotient Complexity of Bifix-, Factor-, and Subword-Free Regular Language

A language $L$ is prefix-free if whenever words $u$ and $v$ are in $L$ and $u$ is a prefix of $v$, then $u=v$. Suffix-, factor-, and subword-free languages are defined similarly, where by ``subword" we mean ``subsequence", and a language is bifix-free if it is both prefix- and suffix-free. These languages have important applications in coding theory. The quotient complexity of an operation on regular languages is defined as the number of left quotients of the result of the operation as a function of the numbers of left quotients of the operands. The quotient complexity of a regular language is the same as its state complexity, which is the number of states in the complete minimal deterministic finite automaton accepting the language. The state/quotient complexity of operations in the classes of prefix- and suffix-free languages has been studied before. Here, we study the complexity of operations in the classes of bifix-, factor-, and subword-free languages. We find tight upper bounds on the quotient complexity of intersection, union, difference, symmetric difference, concatenation, star, and reversal in these three classes of languages.Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [OGP0000871]Slovak Research and Development Agency [APVV-0035-10]Algorithms, Automata, and Discrete Data Structures VEGA, [2/0183/11

Complexity of right-ideal, prefix-closed, and prefix-free regular languages

A language L over an alphabet Σ is prefix-convex if, for any words x, y, z ϵ Σ* , whenever x and xyz are in L, then so is xy. Prefix-convex languages include right-ideal, prefix-closed, and prefix-free languages as special cases. We examine complexity properties of these special prefix-convex languages. In particular, we study the quotient/state complexity of boolean operations, product (concatenation), star, and reversal, the size of the syntactic semigroup, and the quotient complexity of atoms. For binary operations we use arguments with different alphabets when appropriate; this leads to higher tight upper bounds than those obtained with equal alphabets. We exhibit right-ideal, prefix-closed, and prefix-free languages that meet the complexity bounds for all the measures listed above

Complexity of Right-Ideal, Prefix-Closed, and Prefix-Free Regular Languages

A language L over an alphabet E is prefix-convex if, for any words x, y, z is an element of Sigma*, whenever x and xyz are in L, then so is xy. Prefix-convex languages include right-ideal, prefix-closed, and prefix-free languages as special cases. We examine complexity properties of these special prefix-convex languages. In particular, we study the quotient/state complexity of boolean operations, product (concatenation), star, and reversal, the size of the syntactic semi group, and the quotient complexity of atoms. For binary operations we use arguments with different alphabets when appropriate; this leads to higher tight upper bounds than those obtained with equal alphabets. We exhibit right-ideal, prefix-closed, and prefix-free languages that meet the complexity bounds for all the measures listed above.Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [OGP0000871

Quotient Complexity of Regular Languages

The past research on the state complexity of operations on regular languages is examined, and a new approach based on an old method (derivatives of regular expressions) is presented. Since state complexity is a property of a language, it is appropriate to define it in formal-language terms as the number of distinct quotients of the language, and to call it "quotient complexity". The problem of finding the quotient complexity of a language f(K,L) is considered, where K and L are regular languages and f is a regular operation, for example, union or concatenation. Since quotients can be represented by derivatives, one can find a formula for the typical quotient of f(K,L) in terms of the quotients of K and L. To obtain an upper bound on the number of quotients of f(K,L) all one has to do is count how many such quotients are possible, and this makes automaton constructions unnecessary. The advantages of this point of view are illustrated by many examples. Moreover, new general observations are presented to help in the estimation of the upper bounds on quotient complexity of regular operations

Large Aperiodic Semigroups

The syntactic complexity of a regular language is the size of its syntactic semigroup. This semigroup is isomorphic to the transition semigroup of the minimal deterministic finite automaton accepting the language, that is, to the semigroup generated by transformations induced by non-empty words on the set of states of the automaton. In this paper we search for the largest syntactic semigroup of a star-free language having $n$ left quotients; equivalently, we look for the largest transition semigroup of an aperiodic finite automaton with $n$ states. We introduce two new aperiodic transition semigroups. The first is generated by transformations that change only one state; we call such transformations and resulting semigroups unitary. In particular, we study complete unitary semigroups which have a special structure, and we show that each maximal unitary semigroup is complete. For $n \ge 4$ there exists a complete unitary semigroup that is larger than any aperiodic semigroup known to date. We then present even larger aperiodic semigroups, generated by transformations that map a non-empty subset of states to a single state; we call such transformations and semigroups semiconstant. In particular, we examine semiconstant tree semigroups which have a structure based on full binary trees. The semiconstant tree semigroups are at present the best candidates for largest aperiodic semigroups. We also prove that $2^n-1$ is an upper bound on the state complexity of reversal of star-free languages, and resolve an open problem about a special case of state complexity of concatenation of star-free languages.Comment: 22 pages, 1 figure, 2 table