Multi-Head Finite Automata: Characterizations, Concepts and Open Problems

Multi-head finite automata were introduced in (Rabin, 1964) and (Rosenberg, 1966). Since that time, a vast literature on computational and descriptional complexity issues on multi-head finite automata documenting the importance of these devices has been developed. Although multi-head finite automata are a simple concept, their computational behavior can be already very complex and leads to undecidable or even non-semi-decidable problems on these devices such as, for example, emptiness, finiteness, universality, equivalence, etc. These strong negative results trigger the study of subclasses and alternative characterizations of multi-head finite automata for a better understanding of the nature of non-recursive trade-offs and, thus, the borderline between decidable and undecidable problems. In the present paper, we tour a fragment of this literature

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

Highly Undecidable Problems For Infinite Computations

We show that many classical decision problems about 1-counter omega-languages, context free omega-languages, or infinitary rational relations, are $\Pi_2^1$-complete, hence located at the second level of the analytical hierarchy, and "highly undecidable". In particular, the universality problem, the inclusion problem, the equivalence problem, the determinizability problem, the complementability problem, and the unambiguity problem are all $\Pi_2^1$-complete for context-free omega-languages or for infinitary rational relations. Topological and arithmetical properties of 1-counter omega-languages, context free omega-languages, or infinitary rational relations, are also highly undecidable. These very surprising results provide the first examples of highly undecidable problems about the behaviour of very simple finite machines like 1-counter automata or 2-tape automata.Comment: to appear in RAIRO-Theoretical Informatics and Application

Transductions Computed by One-Dimensional Cellular Automata

Cellular automata are investigated towards their ability to compute transductions, that is, to transform inputs into outputs. The families of transductions computed are classified with regard to the time allowed to process the input and to compute the output. Since there is a particular interest in fast transductions, we mainly focus on the time complexities real time and linear time. We first investigate the computational capabilities of cellular automaton transducers by comparing them to iterative array transducers, that is, we compare parallel input/output mode to sequential input/output mode of massively parallel machines. By direct simulations, it turns out that the parallel mode is not weaker than the sequential one. Moreover, with regard to certain time complexities cellular automaton transducers are even more powerful than iterative arrays. In the second part of the paper, the model in question is compared with the sequential devices single-valued finite state transducers and deterministic pushdown transducers. It turns out that both models can be simulated by cellular automaton transducers faster than by iterative array transducers.Comment: In Proceedings AUTOMATA&JAC 2012, arXiv:1208.249

Reachability in Higher-Order-Counters

Higher-order counter automata (\HOCS) can be either seen as a restriction of higher-order pushdown automata (\HOPS) to a unary stack alphabet, or as an extension of counter automata to higher levels. We distinguish two principal kinds of \HOCS: those that can test whether the topmost counter value is zero and those which cannot. We show that control-state reachability for level $k$ \HOCS with $0$-test is complete for \mbox{$(k-2)$}-fold exponential space; leaving out the $0$-test leads to completeness for \mbox{$(k-2)$}-fold exponential time. Restricting \HOCS (without $0$-test) to level $2$, we prove that global (forward or backward) reachability analysis is \PTIME-complete. This enhances the known result for pushdown systems which are subsumed by level $2$ \HOCS without $0$-test. We transfer our results to the formal language setting. Assuming that \PTIME \subsetneq \PSPACE \subsetneq \mathbf{EXPTIME}, we apply proof ideas of Engelfriet and conclude that the hierarchies of languages of \HOPS and of \HOCS form strictly interleaving hierarchies. Interestingly, Engelfriet's constructions also allow to conclude immediately that the hierarchy of collapsible pushdown languages is strict level-by-level due to the existing complexity results for reachability on collapsible pushdown graphs. This answers an open question independently asked by Parys and by Kobayashi.Comment: Version with Full Proofs of a paper that appears at MFCS 201