Advertisement

State Complexity of Simple Splicing

  • Lila Kari
  • Timothy NgEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11612)

Abstract

Splicing, as a binary word/language operation, was inspired by the DNA recombination under the action of restriction enzymes and ligases, and was first introduced by Tom Head in 1987. Splicing systems as generative mechanisms were defined as consisting of an initial starting set of words called an axiom set, and a set of splicing rules—each encoding a splicing operation—, as their computational engine to iteratively generate new strings starting from the axiom set. Since finite splicing systems (splicing systems with a finite axiom set and a finite set of splicing rules) generate a subclass of the family of regular languages, descriptional complexity questions about splicing systems can be answered in terms of the size of the minimal deterministic finite automata that recognize their languages. In this paper we focus on a particular type of splicing systems, called simple splicing systems, where the splicing rules are of a particular form. We prove a tight state complexity bound of \(2^n - 1\) for (semi-)simple splicing systems with a regular initial language with state complexity \(n \ge 3\). We also show that the state complexity of a (semi-)simple splicing system with a finite initial language is at most \(2^{n-2} + 1\), and that whether this bound is reachable or not depends on the size of the alphabet and the number of splicing rules.

References

  1. 1.
    Bonizzoni, P., Ferretti, C., Mauri, G., Zizza, R.: Separating some splicing models. Inform. Process. Lett. 79(6), 255–259 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Câmpeanu, C., Culik, K., Salomaa, K., Yu, S.: State Complexity of Basic Operations on Finite Languages. In: Boldt, O., Jürgensen, H. (eds.) WIA 1999. LNCS, vol. 2214, pp. 60–70. Springer, Heidelberg (2001).  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45526-4_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ceterchi, R.: An algebraic characterization of semi-simple splicing. Fund. Inform. 73(1–2), 19–25 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Culik II, K., Harju, T.: Splicing semigroups of dominoes and DNA. Discrete Appl. Math. 31(3), 261–277 (1991).  https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-218X(91)90054-ZMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Enaganti, S.K., Kari, L., Ng, T., Wang, Z.: Word blending in formal languages: the brangelina effect. In: Stepney, S., Verlan, S. (eds.) UCNC 2018. LNCS, vol. 10867, pp. 72–85. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92435-9_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gao, Y., Moreira, N., Reis, R., Yu, S.: A survey on operational state complexity. J. Autom. Lang. Comb. 21(4), 251–310 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.25596/jalc-2016-251MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gatterdam, R.W.: Splicing systems and regularity. Int. J. Comput. Math. 31(1–2), 63–67 (1989).  https://doi.org/10.1080/00207168908803788CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Golan, J.S.: Semirings and their Applications. Springer, Dordrecht (1999).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9333-5CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goode, E., Pixton, D.: Semi-simple splicing systems. Where Mathematics. Computer Science, Linguistics and Biology Meet, pp. 343–352. Springer, Dordrecht (2001).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9634-3_30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Head, T.: Formal language theory and DNA: an analysis of the generative capacity of specific recombinant behaviors. Bull. Math. Biol. 49(6), 737–759 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Head, T., Pixton, D.: Splicing and regularity. In: Esik, Z., Martín-Vide, C., Mitrana, V. (eds.) Recent Advances in Formal Languages and Applications. SCI, vol. 25, pp. 119–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-33461-3_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Holzer, M., Jakobi, S.: Chop operations and expressions: descriptional complexity considerations. In: Mauri, G., Leporati, A. (eds.) DLT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6795, pp. 264–275. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22321-1_23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Loos, R., Malcher, A., Wotschke, D.: Descriptional complexity of splicing systems. Internat. J. Found. Comput. Sci. 19(4), 813–826 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mateescu, A., Păun, G., Rozenberg, G., Salomaa, A.: Simple splicing systems. Discrete Appl. Math. 84(1–3), 145–163 (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-218X(98)00002-XMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pixton, D.: Regularity of splicing languages. Discrete Appl. Math. 69(1–2), 101–124 (1996).  https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-218X(95)00079-7MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Păun, G.: On the splicing operation. Discrete Appl. Math. 70(1), 57–79 (1996).  https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-218X(96)00101-1MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations