Some hierarchies for the communication complexity measures of cooperating grammar systems

  • Juraj Hromkovic
  • Jarkko Kari
  • Lila Kari
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 711)


We investigate here the descriptional and the computational complexity of parallel communicating grammar systems (PCGS). A new descriptional complexity measure — the communication structure of the PCGS — is introduced and related to the communication complexity (the number of communications). Several hierarchies resulting from these complexity measures and some relations between the measures are established. The results are obtained due to the development of two lower-bound proof techniques for PCGS. The first one is a generalization of pumping lemmas from formal language theory and the second one reduces the lower bound problem for some PCGS to the proof of lower bounds on the number of reversals of certain sequential computing models.


Complexity Measure Communication Complexity Communication Graph Communication Step Input Word 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    K.Culik, J.Gruska, A.Salomaa. Systolic trellis automata. International Journal of Computer Mathematics 15 and 16 (1984).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P.Duris, J.Hromkovic: Zerotesting bounded multicounter machines. Kybernetika 23(1987), No.1, 13–18.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S.Ginsburg: Algebraic and Automata-Theoretic Properties of Formal Languages. North-Holland Publ.Comp., Amsterdam 1975.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C.A.R.Hoare. Communicating sequential processes. Comm. ACM 21 vol. 8 (1978).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J.Hromkovic: Hierarchy of reversal bounded one-way multicounter machines. Kybernetica 22(1986), No.2, 200–206.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Kari. Decision problems concerning cellular automata. University of Turku, PhD Thesis (1990).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D.Pardubska. The communication hierarchies of parallel communicating systems. Proceedings of IMYCS'92, to appear.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gh.Paun. On the power of synchronization in parallel communicating grammar systems. Stud. Cerc. Matem. 41 vol.3 (1989).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gh.Paun. Parallel communicating grammar systems: the context-free case. Found. Control Engineering 14 vol.1 (1989).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gh. Paun. On the syntactic complexity of parallel communicating grammar systems. Kybernetika, 28(1992), 155–166.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gh.Paun, L.Santean. Further remarks on parallel communicating grammar systems. International Journal of Computer Mathematics 35 (1990).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gh.Paun, L.Santean. Parallel communicating grammar systems: the regular case. Ann. Univ. Buc. Ser. Mat.-Inform. 37 vol.2 (1989).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A.Salomaa. Formal Languages. Academic Press New York London (1973).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. Santean, J.Kari: The impact of the number of cooperating grammars on the generative power, Theoretical Computer Science, 98, 2(1992), 249–263.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. Wierzchula: Systeme von parallellen Grammatiken (in German). Diploma thesis, Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Paderborn, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juraj Hromkovic
    • 1
  • Jarkko Kari
    • 2
  • Lila Kari
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of PaderbornPaderbornGermany
  2. 2.Academy of Finland and Department of MathematicsUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations