Advertisement

Hierarchies over the context-free languages

  • Klaus Reinhardt
Part III Communications
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 464)

Abstract

Alternation is a generalized principle of nondeterminism. The alternating turing machine is used to characterize the polynomial hierarchy. In this paper we show, that a hierarchy can be characterized with alternating pushdown automata, which we expect to be strict in contrast to a hierarchy with alternating finite automata or alternating space bounded automata. We describe a similar oracle hierarchy over the context-free languages, for which we construct complete languages. We show, that each level of the hierarchy with alternating pushdown automata is included in the corresponding level of the oracle hierarchy and that the logarithmic closure over both levels is the corresponding level of the polynomial hierarchy with one alternation less.

The principle of the alternation is also transfered to grammars. Hereby we prove, that the hierarchy with alternating context-free grammars is identical with the oracle hierarchy over the context-free languages and that in case of unbounded alternation context-free and context-sensitive grammars have the same power.

Keywords

Finite Automaton Universal State Sentential Form Polynomial Hierarchy Existential Variable 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Ber79]
    J. Berstel: Transductions and Context-Free Languages, Teubner 1979.Google Scholar
  2. [CKS81]
    A.K. Chandra, D.C. Kozen, L.J. Stockmeyer; Alternation, Journ. of the ACM 28,1(1981), 114–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [Coo71]
    S.A. Cook: Characterizations of pushdown machines in terms of timebounded computers, Journ. of the ACM 18,1(1971), 4–18Google Scholar
  4. [HoUl79]
    J.E. Hopcroft, J.D. Ullman: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation, Addison-Wesley, 1979.Google Scholar
  5. [Imm88]
    N. Immerman: Nondeterministic space is closed under complementation, SIAM Journ. Comput. 15, 5 (1988), 935–938.Google Scholar
  6. [JeKi89]
    Birgit Jenner, Bernd Kirsig: Characterizing the polynomial hierarchy by alternating auxiliary pushdown automata. Theoretical Informatics and Applications, 1989, 87–99.Google Scholar
  7. [KoHo66]
    A.J. Korenjak, J.E. Hopcroft: Simple deterministic languages, Conf. Rec. 7th Annual IEEE Symp. Switching and Automata Theory (1966), 36–46.Google Scholar
  8. [LSL84]
    R.E. Ladner,L.J. Stockmeyer,R.J. Lipton: Alternation bounded auxiliary pushdown automata, Information and Control 62(1984), 93–108.Google Scholar
  9. [Mor89]
    Etsuro Moriya: A grammatical characterization of alternating pushdown automata, TCS 67 (1989) 75–85.Google Scholar
  10. [Sze88]
    R. Szelepcsenyi: The Method of forced enumeration for nondeterministic automata, Acta Informatica 26(1988), 279–284.Google Scholar
  11. [Soare87]
    Robert I. Soare: Recursively Enumerable Sets and Degrees, Springer 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [Sto76]
    L.J. Stockmeyer: The polynomial-time hierarchy, Theoret. Comp. Sci. 3 (1976), 1–22.Google Scholar
  13. [Sud78]
    I.H. Sudborough: On the tape complexity of deterministic context-free languages, Journ. of the ACM 25, 3 (1978),405–414.Google Scholar
  14. [Wra76]
    C. Wrathall: Complete sets and the polynomial-time hierarchy, Theoret. Comp. Sci. 3 (1976), 23–33.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Klaus Reinhardt
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für InformatikUniversität StuttgartStuttgart-1

Personalised recommendations