On Halting Process of Quantum Turing Machine

We prove that there is no algorithm to tell whether an arbitrarily constructed Quantum Turing Machine has same time steps for different branches of computation. We, hence, can not avoid the notion of halting to be probabilistic in Quantum Turing Machine. Our result suggests that halting scheme of Quantum Turing Machine and quantum complexity theory based upon the existing halting scheme sholud be reexamined.Comment: 2 page

An Intensional Concurrent Faithful Encoding of Turing Machines

The benchmark for computation is typically given as Turing computability; the ability for a computation to be performed by a Turing Machine. Many languages exploit (indirect) encodings of Turing Machines to demonstrate their ability to support arbitrary computation. However, these encodings are usually by simulating the entire Turing Machine within the language, or by encoding a language that does an encoding or simulation itself. This second category is typical for process calculi that show an encoding of lambda-calculus (often with restrictions) that in turn simulates a Turing Machine. Such approaches lead to indirect encodings of Turing Machines that are complex, unclear, and only weakly equivalent after computation. This paper presents an approach to encoding Turing Machines into intensional process calculi that is faithful, reduction preserving, and structurally equivalent. The encoding is demonstrated in a simple asymmetric concurrent pattern calculus before generalised to simplify infinite terms, and to show encodings into Concurrent Pattern Calculus and Psi Calculi.Comment: In Proceedings ICE 2014, arXiv:1410.701

Verifying Time Complexity of Deterministic Turing Machines

We show that, for all reasonable functions $T(n)=o(n\log n)$, we can algorithmically verify whether a given one-tape Turing machine runs in time at most $T(n)$. This is a tight bound on the order of growth for the function $T$ because we prove that, for $T(n)\geq(n+1)$ and $T(n)=\Omega(n\log n)$, there exists no algorithm that would verify whether a given one-tape Turing machine runs in time at most $T(n)$. We give results also for the case of multi-tape Turing machines. We show that we can verify whether a given multi-tape Turing machine runs in time at most $T(n)$ iff $T(n_0)< (n_0+1)$ for some $n_0\in\mathbb{N}$. We prove a very general undecidability result stating that, for any class of functions $\mathcal{F}$ that contains arbitrary large constants, we cannot verify whether a given Turing machine runs in time $T(n)$ for some $T\in\mathcal{F}$. In particular, we cannot verify whether a Turing machine runs in constant, polynomial or exponential time.Comment: 18 pages, 1 figur