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

Limited automata and unary languages

Limited automata are one-tape Turing machines that are allowed to rewrite the content of any tape cell only in the first d visits, for a fixed constant d. When d = 1 these models characterize regular languages. An exponential gap between the size of limited automata accepting unary languages and the size of equivalent finite automata is proved. Since a similar gap was already known from unary contextfree grammars to finite automata, also the conversion of such grammars into limited automata is investigated. It is proved that from each unary context-free grammar it is possible to obtain an equivalent 1-limited automaton whose description has a size which is polynomial in the size of the grammar. Furthermore, despite the exponential gap between the sizes of limited automata and of equivalent unary finite automata, there are unary regular languages for which d-limited automata cannot be significantly smaller than equivalent finite automata, for any arbitrarily large d

REGULAR LANGUAGES: TO FINITE AUTOMATA AND BEYOND - SUCCINCT DESCRIPTIONS AND OPTIMAL SIMULATIONS

\uc8 noto che i linguaggi regolari \u2014 o di tipo 3 \u2014 sono equivalenti agli automi a stati finiti. Tuttavia, in letteratura sono presenti altre caratterizzazioni di questa classe di linguaggi, in termini di modelli riconoscitori e grammatiche. Per esempio, limitando le risorse computazionali di modelli pi\uf9 generali, quali grammatiche context-free, automi a pila e macchine di Turing, che caratterizzano classi di linguaggi pi\uf9 ampie, \ue8 possibile ottenere modelli che generano o riconoscono solamente i linguaggi regolari. I dispositivi risultanti forniscono delle rappresentazioni alternative dei linguaggi di tipo 3, che, in alcuni casi, risultano significativamente pi\uf9 compatte rispetto a quelle dei modelli che caratterizzano la stessa classe di linguaggi. Il presente lavoro ha l\u2019obiettivo di studiare questi modelli formali dal punto di vista della complessit\ue0 descrizionale, o, in altre parole, di analizzare le relazioni tra le loro dimensioni, ossia il numero di simboli utilizzati per specificare la loro descrizione. Sono presentati, inoltre, alcuni risultati connessi allo studio della famosa domanda tuttora aperta posta da Sakoda e Sipser nel 1978, inerente al costo, in termini di numero di stati, per l\u2019eliminazione del nondeterminismo dagli automi stati finiti sfruttando la capacit\ue0 degli automi two-way deterministici di muovere la testina avanti e indietro sul nastro di input.It is well known that regular \u2014 or type 3 \u2014 languages are equivalent to finite automata. Nevertheless, many other characterizations of this class of languages in terms of computational devices and generative models are present in the literature. For example, by suitably restricting more general models such as context-free grammars, pushdown automata, and Turing machines, that characterize wider classes of languages, it is possible to obtain formal models that generate or recognize regular languages only. The resulting formalisms provide alternative representations of type 3 languages that may be significantly more concise than other models that share the same expressing power. The goal of this work is to investigate these formal systems from a descriptional complexity perspective, or, in other words, to study the relationships between their sizes, namely the number of symbols used to write down their descriptions. We also present some results related to the investigation of the famous question posed by Sakoda and Sipser in 1978, concerning the size blowups from nondeterministic finite automata to two-way deterministic finite automata

Strongly limited automata

Limited automata are one-tape Turing machines which are allowed to rewrite each tape cell only in the first d visits, for a given constant d. When d >= 2, these devices characterize the class of context-free languages. In this paper we consider restricted versions of these models which we call strongly limited automata, where rewrites, head reversals, and state changes are allowed only at certain points of the computation. Those restrictions are inspired by a simple algorithm for accepting Dyck languages on 2-limited automata. We prove that the models so defined are still able to recognize all context-free languages. We also consider descriptional complexity aspects. We prove that there are polynomial transformations of context-free grammars and pushdown automata into strongly limited automata and vice versa