...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Foundations of Computer Science >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:确定性VS.双向自动机的不确定性:用逻辑公式表示状态的含义

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

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 first 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 possible 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:对于双向自动机,非确定性是否比确定性更强大的问题是形式语言理论与自动机理论之间边界上最著名的老问题之一。到目前为止,仅针对某些受限版本的双向自动机,证明了双向非确定性有限自动机(2NFA)和其确定性对应物(2DFA)的状态数之间的指数差距。此问题还与著名的DLOG vs. NLOG问题有关。对于2DFA与2NFA问题,在Sipser和Sakoda完整语言的参数中,多项式长度的单词上2NFA和2DFA之间的超多项式间隙将暗示DLOG是NLOG的适当子集。本文的首要目标是首先调查解决2DFA与2NFA问题的尝试。此后,我们讨论了尽管有一个很清楚的直觉,为什么对于这种计算模型,非确定性必须比确定性更强大,但这个问题为何如此困难。似乎难以解决的问题在于,当试图证明2DFA的状态数的下限时,我们无法强迫这些状态具有明确的含义。在设计自动机时,我们始终为每个状态分配明确的解释。为了捕获状态含义的概念,我们对双向自动机引入了新的限制:每个状态都分配了一个逻辑表达式,用于表达输入单词的某些属性,并且必须以这种方式设计自动机的过渡每当自动机处于给定状态时,分配的公式为true。在我们的方法中,我们使用具有各种解释原子的命题公式。对于两种可能的逻辑,我们证明了2NFA和2DFA之间的指数差距。此外,使用将意义分配给2DFA的状态的概念,我们表明,在Sakoda和Sipser完整语言的多项式长度的输入中,一般2NFA和2DFA之间没有指数差距。

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