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

State minimization problems in finite state automata

In this thesis, we analyze the problem of state minimization in 2-MDFAs. The class of 2-MDFAs is an extension of the class of DFAs, allowing a small amount of nondeterminism; specifically two start states. Since nondeterminism allows finite automata to be more succinct, it is worthwhile to investigate the problem of minimizing such finite automata. In the case of unbounded non-determinism, i.e., NFAs, such automata can be exponentially more succinct than DFAs [1], but the corresponding minimization problem is PSPACE-complete [2]. Even in the case of 2-MDFAs, which are only polynomially more succinct than DFAs, the minimization problem remains non-trivial; indeed, [3] shows that the corresponding decision problem is NP-complete. We are concerned with the approximability of the 2-MDFA minimization problem. Our main contribution in the current work is the design of an n-factor approximation algorithm for state minimization in 2-MDFAs

Ambiguity, nondeterminism and state complexity of finite automata

The degree of ambiguity counts the number of accepting computations of a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) on a given input. Alternatively, the nondeterminism of an NFA can be measured by counting the amount of guessing in a single computation or the number of leaves of the computation tree on a given input. This paper surveys work on the degree of ambiguity and on various nondeterminism measures for finite automata. In particular, we focus on state complexity comparisons between NFAs with quantified ambiguity or nondeterminism

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

Ambiguity and Communication

The ambiguity of a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) N for input size n is the maximal number of accepting computations of N for an input of size n. For all k, r 2 N we construct languages Lr,k which can be recognized by NFA's with size k poly(r) and ambiguity O(nk), but Lr,k has only NFA's with exponential size, if ambiguity o(nk) is required. In particular, a hierarchy for polynomial ambiguity is obtained, solving a long standing open problem (Ravikumar and Ibarra, 1989, Leung, 1998)

26. Theorietag Automaten und Formale Sprachen 23. Jahrestagung Logik in der Informatik: Tagungsband

Der Theorietag ist die Jahrestagung der Fachgruppe Automaten und Formale Sprachen der Gesellschaft für Informatik und fand erstmals 1991 in Magdeburg statt. Seit dem Jahr 1996 wird der Theorietag von einem eintägigen Workshop mit eingeladenen Vorträgen begleitet. Die Jahrestagung der Fachgruppe Logik in der Informatik der Gesellschaft für Informatik fand erstmals 1993 in Leipzig statt. Im Laufe beider Jahrestagungen finden auch die jährliche Fachgruppensitzungen statt. In diesem Jahr wird der Theorietag der Fachgruppe Automaten und Formale Sprachen erstmalig zusammen mit der Jahrestagung der Fachgruppe Logik in der Informatik abgehalten. Organisiert wurde die gemeinsame Veranstaltung von der Arbeitsgruppe Zuverlässige Systeme des Instituts für Informatik an der Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel vom 4. bis 7. Oktober im Tagungshotel Tannenfelde bei Neumünster. Während des Tre↵ens wird ein Workshop für alle Interessierten statt finden. In Tannenfelde werden • Christoph Löding (Aachen) • Tomás Masopust (Dresden) • Henning Schnoor (Kiel) • Nicole Schweikardt (Berlin) • Georg Zetzsche (Paris) eingeladene Vorträge zu ihrer aktuellen Arbeit halten. Darüber hinaus werden 26 Vorträge von Teilnehmern und Teilnehmerinnen gehalten, 17 auf dem Theorietag Automaten und formale Sprachen und neun auf der Jahrestagung Logik in der Informatik. Der vorliegende Band enthält Kurzfassungen aller Beiträge. Wir danken der Gesellschaft für Informatik, der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel und dem Tagungshotel Tannenfelde für die Unterstützung dieses Theorietags. Ein besonderer Dank geht an das Organisationsteam: Maike Bradler, Philipp Sieweck, Joel Day. Kiel, Oktober 2016 Florin Manea, Dirk Nowotka und Thomas Wilk

A Bit of Nondeterminism Makes Pushdown Automata Expressive and Succinct

We study the expressiveness and succinctness of good-for-games pushdown automata (GFG-PDA) over finite words, that is, pushdown automata whose nondeterminism can be resolved based on the run constructed so far, but independently of the remainder of the input word. We prove that GFG-PDA recognise more languages than deterministic PDA (DPDA) but not all context-free languages (CFL). This class is orthogonal to unambiguous CFL. We further show that GFG-PDA can be exponentially more succinct than DPDA, while PDA can be double-exponentially more succinct than GFG-PDA. We also study GFGness in visibly pushdown automata (VPA), which enjoy better closure properties than PDA, and for which we show GFGness to be EXPTIME-complete. GFG-VPA can be exponentially more succinct than deterministic VPA, while VPA can be exponentially more succinct than GFG-VPA. Both of these lower bounds are tight. Finally, we study the complexity of resolving nondeterminism in GFG-PDA. Every GFG-PDA has a positional resolver, a function that resolves nondeterminism and that is only dependant on the current configuration. Pushdown transducers are sufficient to implement the resolvers of GFG-VPA, but not those of GFG-PDA. GFG-PDA with finite-state resolvers are determinisable

Algorithms and lower bounds in finite automata size complexity

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 2006.Includes bibliographical references (p. 97-99).In this thesis we investigate the relative succinctness of several types of finite automata, focusing mainly on the following four basic models: one-way deterministic (1)FAs), one-way nondeterministic (1NFAs), two-way deterministic (2DFAS), and two-way nondeterministic (2NFAS). First, we establish the exact values of the trade-offs for all conversions from two-way to one-way automata. Specifically, we prove that the functions ... return the exact values of the trade-offs from 2DFAS to 1DFAS, from 2NFAS to 1DFAs, and from 2DFAs or 2NFAS to 1NFAs, respectively. Second, we examine the question whether the trade-offs from NFAs or 2NFAS to 2DiFAs are polynomial or not. We prove two theorems for liveness, the complete problem for the conversion from 1NFAS to 2DFAS. We first focus on moles, a restricted class of 2NFAs that includes the polynomially large 1NFAS which solve liveness. We prove that, in contrast, 2DFA moles cannot solve liveness, irrespective of size.(cont.) We then focus on sweeping 2NFAS, which can change the direction of their input head only on the end-markers. We prove that all sweeping 2NFAs solving the complement of liveness are of exponential size. A simple modification of this argument also proves that the trade-off from 2DFAS to sweeping 2NFAS is exponential. Finally, we examine conversions between two-way automata with more than one head-like devices (e.g., heads, linearly bounded counters, pebbles). We prove that, if the automata of some type A have enough resources to (i) solve problems that no automaton of some other type B can solve, and (ii) simulate any unary 2DFA that has additional access to a linearly-bounded counter, then the trade-off from automata of type A to automata of type B admits no recursive upper bound.by Christos Kapoutsis.Ph.D

Transforming a Single-Valued Transducer Into a Mealy Machine

AbstractThis article deals with the transformation of a single-valued finite transducer into a Mealy machine. The following results are obtained: (1) LetMbe a single-valued real-time (or “letter-to-word”) transducer withnstates, input alphabetΣ, and output alphabetΔwhich is equivalent to some Mealy machineM′. Then,Mcan be effectively transformed into such anM′ having at most 2n+1·min{#Σ, #Δ}n−1states. A similar result holds ifMis not real time. As an important side effect three “Mealy” properties are obtained which characterize the fact that the given transducerMis equivalent to some Mealy machine. (2) The upper bound in result (1) improves to 2n−1 ifMis known to be a letter-to-letter transducer. (3) For every integert⩾2 and every odd integern⩾3 there is a single-valued real-time transducerMwithnstates and input and output alphabets of cardinalitytsuch thatMis equivalent to some Mealy machineM′ and every suchM′ has at leastt(n−1)/2states. (4) Ift=3, then result (3) holds true with letter-to-letter transducers rather than real-time transducers and with a lower bound of 2(n−1)/2. (5) It is a PSPACE-complete problem to decide whether or not a given single-valued transducerMis equivalent to some Mealy machine. The problem remains PSPACE-complete ifMis known to be a letter-to-letter transducer