首页> 外文会议>International Conference on Developments in Language Theory >Determinism vs. Nondeterminism for Two-Way Automata Representing the Meaning of States by Logical Formulae
【24h】

Determinism vs. Nondeterminism for Two-Way Automata Representing the Meaning of States by Logical Formulae

机译:确定主义与非自由度为代表国家逻辑公式的意义的双向自动机构

获取原文

摘要

The question whether nondeterminism is more powerful than determinism for two-way automata is one of the most famous old open problems on the border between formal language theory and automata theory. An exponential gap between the number of states of two-way nondeterministic finite automata (2NFA) and their deterministic counterparts (2DFA) was proved only for some restricted versions of two-way automata up to now. This problem is also related to the famous DLOG vs. NLOG problem. A superpolynomial gap between 2NFAs and 2DFAs on words of polynomial length in the parameter of a complete language of Sipser and Sakoda for the 2DFA vs. 2NFAs problem would imply that DLOG is a proper subset of NLOG. The goal of this paper is first to survey the attempts to solve the 2DFA vs. 2NFA problem. After that we discus why this problem is so hard in spite of the fact that one has a very clear intuition why nondeterminism has to be more powerful than determinism for this computing model. It seems that the hardness lies in the fact that, when trying to prove lower bounds on the number of states of 2DFAs, we are not able to force the states to have a clear meaning. When designing an automaton, we always assign an unambiguous interpretation to each state. In an attempt to capture the concept of meaning of states we introduce a new restriction on the two-way automata: Each state is assigned a logical formula expressing some properties of the input word, and transitions of the automaton must be designed in such a way that the assigned formula is true whenever the automaton is in the given state. In our approach we use propositional formulae with various interpreted atoms. For two such reasonable logics we prove an exponential gap between 2NFAs and 2DFAs. Moreover, using our concept of assigning meaning to the states of 2DFAs we show that there is no exponential gap between general 2NFAs and 2DFAs on inputs of a polynomial length of the complete language of Sakoda and Sipser.
机译:关于非法的问题比双向自动机制的决定主义更强大的问题是正式语言理论与自动化理论之间的边界最着名的旧问题之一。仅针对现在的双向自动机的一些限制性推出的双向非算法有限自动机(2NFA)及其确定性对应物(2DFA)之间的指数差距。这个问题也与着名的DLog与NLOG问题有关。在2DFA与Sakoda的完整语言的参数中,2NFA和2DFA之间的超级性差距和2DFA与2DFA的Sakoda的参数.2NFA问题暗示DLog是NLOG的适当子集。本文的目标是第一个调查解决2DFA与2NFA问题的尝试。之后我们讨论为什么这个问题很难尽管有一个非常明确的直觉为什么不明确的直觉,为什么不比这种计算模型的决定主义更强大。似乎硬度在于,在试图证明在2DFA的州的数量下降时,我们无法强迫各国具有明确的意义。在设计自动机时,我们始终为每个州分配明确的解释。在尝试捕获状态的含义概念时,我们对双向自动机引入新的限制:每个状态被分配了一个逻辑公式,表达了输入字的一些属性,并且必须以这样的方式设计自动机的转换每当自动机处于给定状态时,已分配的公式是正确的。在我们的方法中,我们使用具有各种解释原子的命题公式。对于两种这样的合理逻辑,我们证明了2NFA和2DFA之间的指数差距。此外,使用我们对2DFA的州的分配含义的概念,我们表明,一般2NFAS和2DFA之间没有指数差距,在Sakoda和Sipeer的完整语言的多项式长度的输入上。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号