8 research outputs found

    Higher-Order Operator Precedence Languages

    Get PDF
    Floyd's Operator Precedence (OP) languages are a deterministic context-free family having many desirable properties. They are locally and parallely parsable, and languages having a compatible structure are closed under Boolean operations, concatenation and star; they properly include the family of Visibly Pushdown (or Input Driven) languages. OP languages are based on three relations between any two consecutive terminal symbols, which assign syntax structure to words. We extend such relations to k-tuples of consecutive terminal symbols, by using the model of strictly locally testable regular languages of order k at least 3. The new corresponding class of Higher-order Operator Precedence languages (HOP) properly includes the OP languages, and it is still included in the deterministic (also in reverse) context free family. We prove Boolean closure for each subfamily of structurally compatible HOP languages. In each subfamily, the top language is called max-language. We show that such languages are defined by a simple cancellation rule and we prove several properties, in particular that max-languages make an infinite hierarchy ordered by parameter k. HOP languages are a candidate for replacing OP languages in the various applications where they have have been successful though sometimes too restrictive.Comment: In Proceedings AFL 2017, arXiv:1708.0622

    Toward a theory of input-driven locally parsable languages

    Get PDF
    If a context-free language enjoys the local parsability property then, no matter how the source string is segmented, each segment can be parsed independently, and an efficient parallel parsing algorithm becomes possible. The new class of locally chain parsable languages (LCPLs), included in the deterministic context-free language family, is here defined by means of the chain-driven automaton and characterized by decidable properties of grammar derivations. Such automaton decides whether to reduce or not a substring in a way purely driven by the terminal characters, thus extending the well-known concept of input-driven (ID) alias visibly pushdown machines. The LCPL family extends and improves the practically relevant Floyd's operator-precedence (OP) languages which are known to strictly include the ID languages, and for which a parallel-parser generator exists

    Input-Driven Tissue P Automata

    Get PDF
    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

    Probabilistic Input-Driven Pushdown Automata

    Get PDF

    Deterministic Real-Time Tree-Walking-Storage Automata

    Full text link
    We study deterministic tree-walking-storage automata, which are finite-state devices equipped with a tree-like storage. These automata are generalized stack automata, where the linear stack storage is replaced by a non-linear tree-like stack. Therefore, tree-walking-storage automata have the ability to explore the interior of the tree storage without altering the contents, with the possible moves of the tree pointer corresponding to those of tree-walking automata. In addition, a tree-walking-storage automaton can append (push) non-existent descendants to a tree node and remove (pop) leaves from the tree. Here we are particularly considering the capacities of deterministic tree-walking-storage automata working in real time. It is shown that even the non-erasing variant can accept rather complicated unary languages as, for example, the language of words whose lengths are powers of two, or the language of words whose lengths are Fibonacci numbers. Comparing the computational capacities with automata from the classical automata hierarchy, we derive that the families of languages accepted by real-time deterministic (non-erasing) tree-walking-storage automata is located between the regular and the deterministic context-sensitive languages. There is a context-free language that is not accepted by any real-time deterministic tree-walking-storage automaton. On the other hand, these devices accept a unary language in non-erasing mode that cannot be accepted by any classical stack automaton, even in erasing mode and arbitrary time. Basic closure properties of the induced families of languages are shown. In particular, we consider Boolean operations (complementation, union, intersection) and AFL operations (union, intersection with regular languages, homomorphism, inverse homomorphism, concatenation, iteration). It turns out that the two families in question have the same properties and, in particular, share all but one of these closure properties with the important family of deterministic context-free languages.Comment: In Proceedings NCMA 2023, arXiv:2309.0733

    Beyond operator-precedence grammars and languages

    Get PDF
    Operator Precedence Languages (OPL) are deterministic context-free and have desirable properties. OPL are parallely parsable, and, when structurally compatible, are closed under Boolean operations, concatenation and star; they include the Input Driven languages. OPL use three relations between two terminal symbols, to assign syntax structure to words. We extend such relations to k-tuples of consecutive symbols, in agreement with strictly locally testable regular languages. For each k, the new corresponding class of Higher-order Operator Precedence languages properly includes the OPL and enjoy many of their properties. OPL are a strict hierarchy based on k, which contains maximal languages

    Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

    Get PDF
    This open access two-volume set constitutes the proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, TACAS 2021, which was held during March 27 – April 1, 2021, as part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2021. The conference was planned to take place in Luxembourg and changed to an online format due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The total of 41 full papers presented in the proceedings was carefully reviewed and selected from 141 submissions. The volume also contains 7 tool papers; 6 Tool Demo papers, 9 SV-Comp Competition Papers. The papers are organized in topical sections as follows: Part I: Game Theory; SMT Verification; Probabilities; Timed Systems; Neural Networks; Analysis of Network Communication. Part II: Verification Techniques (not SMT); Case Studies; Proof Generation/Validation; Tool Papers; Tool Demo Papers; SV-Comp Tool Competition Papers

    Digging input-driven pushdown automata

    No full text
    Input-driven pushdown automata (IDPDA) are pushdown automata where the next action on the pushdown store (push, pop, nothing) is solely governed by the input symbol. Nowadays such devices are usually defined such that popping from the empty pushdown does not block the computation but continues it with empty pushdown. Here, we consider IDPDAs that have a more balanced behavior concerning pushing and popping. Digging input-driven pushdown automata (DIDPDA) are basically IDPDAs that, when forced to pop from the empty pushdown, dig a hole of the shape of the popped symbol in the bottom of the pushdown. Popping further symbols from a pushdown having a hole at the bottom deepens the current hole furthermore. The hole can only be filled up by pushing symbols previously popped. We study the impact of the new behavior of DIDPDAs on their power and compare their capacities with the capacities of ordinary IDPDAs and tinput-driven pushdown automata which are basically IDPDAs whose input may be preprocessed by length-preserving finite state transducers. It turns out that the capabilities are incomparable. We address the determinization of DIDPDAs and their descriptional complexity, closure properties, and decidability questions
    corecore