Abstract
The question of the state-size cost for simulation of two-way nondeterministic automata (2nfas) by two-way deterministic automata (2dfas) was raised in 1978 and, despite many attempts, it is still open. Subsequently, the problem was attacked by restricting the power of 2dfas (e.g., using a restricted input head movement) to the degree for which it was already possible to derive some exponential gaps between the weaker model and the standard 2nfas. Here we use an opposite approach, increasing the power of 2dfas to the degree for which it is still possible to obtain a subexponential conversion from the stronger model to the standard 2dfas. In particular, it turns out that subexponential conversion is possible for two-way automata that make nondeterministic choices only when the input head scans one of the input tape endmarkers. However, there is no restriction on the input head movement. This implies that an exponential gap between 2nfas and 2dfas can be obtained only for unrestricted 2nfas using capabilities beyond the proposed new model.
As an additional bonus, conversion into a machine for the complement of the original language is polynomial in this model. The same holds for making such machines self-verifying, halting, or unambiguous. Finally, any superpolynomial lower bound for the simulation of such machines by standard 2dfas would imply L ≠ NL. In the same way, the alternating version of these machines is related to L ≟ NL ≟ P, the classical computational complexity problems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Berman, P.: A note on Sweeping Automata. In: de Bakker, J.W., van Leeuwen, J. (eds.) ICALP 1980. LNCS, vol. 85, pp. 91–97. Springer, Heidelberg (1980)
Berman, P., Lingas, A.: On the complexity of regular languages in terms of finite automata. Tech. Rep. 304, Polish Academy of Sciences (1977)
Chandra, A.K., Kozen, D., Stockmeyer, L.J.: Alternation. J. ACM 28(1), 114–133 (1981)
Chrobak, M.: Finite automata and unary languages. Theoretical Computer Science 47, 149–158 (1986); Errata: ibid 302, 497–498
Duris, P., Hromkovič, J., Rolim, J.D.P., Schnitger, G.: Las Vegas Versus Determinism for One-way Communication Complexity, Finite Automata, and Polynomial-time Computations. In: Reischuk, R., Morvan, M. (eds.) STACS 1997. LNCS, vol. 1200, pp. 117–128. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Geffert, V.: An alternating hierarchy for finite automata. In: Non-Classical Models of Automata and Applications (NCMA 2011), pp. 15–36 (2011)
Geffert, V., Mereghetti, C., Pighizzini, G.: Converting two-way nondeterministic unary automata into simpler automata. Theor. Comput. Sci. 295, 189–203 (2003)
Geffert, V., Mereghetti, C., Pighizzini, G.: Complementing two-way finite automata. Inf. Comput. 205(8), 1173–1187 (2007)
Geffert, V., Pighizzini, G.: Two-way unary automata versus logarithmic space. Inf. Comput. 209(7), 1016–1025 (2011)
Hopcroft, J.E., Ullman, J.D.: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation. Addison-Wesley (1979)
Hromkovič, J., Schnitger, G.: Nondeterminism Versus Determinism for Two-way Finite Automata: Generalizations of Sipser’s Separation. In: Baeten, J.C.M., Lenstra, J.K., Parrow, J., Woeginger, G.J. (eds.) ICALP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2719, pp. 439–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Immerman, N.: Number of quantifiers is better than number of tape cells. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 22(3), 384–406 (1981)
Kapoutsis, C.A.: Small Sweeping 2NFAs Are Not Closed Under Complement. In: Bugliesi, M., Preneel, B., Sassone, V., Wegener, I. (eds.) ICALP 2006, Part I. LNCS, vol. 4051, pp. 144–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Kapoutsis, C.A.: Size Complexity of Two-Way Finite Automata. In: Diekert, V., Nowotka, D. (eds.) DLT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5583, pp. 47–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Kapoutsis, C.A.: Nondeterminism Is Essential in Small 2FAs with Few Reversals. In: Aceto, L., Henzinger, M., Sgall, J. (eds.) ICALP 2011, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6756, pp. 198–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Kapoutsis, C.A.: Two-Way Automata versus Logarithmic Space. In: Kulikov, A.S., Vereshchagin, N.K. (eds.) CSR 2011. LNCS, vol. 6651, pp. 359–372. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Kapoutsis, C.A., Pighizzini, G.: Two-way automata characterizations of L/poly versus NL (2011) (submitted manuscript)
Micali, S.: Two-way deterministic finite automata are exponentially more succinct than sweeping automata. Information Processing Letters 12(2), 103–105 (1981)
Sakoda, W.J., Sipser, M.: Nondeterminism and the size of two way finite automata. In: STOC, pp. 275–286. ACM (1978)
Savitch, W.J.: Relationships between nondeterministic and deterministic tape complexities. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 4(2), 177–192 (1970)
Sipser, M.: Halting space-bounded computations. Theor. Comput. Sci. 10, 335–338 (1980)
Sipser, M.: Lower bounds on the size of sweeping automata. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 21(2), 195–202 (1980)
Szepietowski, A.: Turing Machines with Sublogarithmic Space. LNCS, vol. 843. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Geffert, V., Guillon, B., Pighizzini, G. (2012). Two-Way Automata Making Choices Only at the Endmarkers. In: Dediu, AH., Martín-Vide, C. (eds) Language and Automata Theory and Applications. LATA 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7183. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28332-1_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28332-1_23
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-28331-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-28332-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)