Advertisement

Multi-sequential Word Relations

  • Ismaël JeckerEmail author
  • Emmanuel Filiot
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9168)

Abstract

Rational relations are binary relations of finite words that are realised by non-deterministic finite state transducers (NFT). A particular kind of rational relations is the sequential functions. Sequential functions are the functions that can be realised by input-deterministic transducers. Some rational functions are not sequential. However, based on a property on transducers called the twinning property, it is decidable in PTime whether a rational function given by an NFT is sequential. In this paper, we investigate the generalisation of this result to multi-sequential relations, i.e. relations that are equal to a finite union of sequential functions. We show that given an NFT, it is decidable in PTime whether the relation it defines is multi-sequential, based on a property called the fork property. If the fork property is not satisfied, we give a procedure that effectively constructs a finite set of input-deterministic transducers whose union defines the relation. This procedure generalises to arbitrary NFT the determinisation procedure of functional NFT.

Keywords

Rational Relation Sequential Function Input Word Free Monoid Strongly Connect Component 
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. 1.
    Allauzen, C., Mohri, M.: Finitely subsequential transducers. Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci. 14(6), 983–994 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bala, S.: Which Finitely Ambiguous Automata Recognize Finitely Sequential Functions? In: Chatterjee, K., Sgall, J. (eds.) MFCS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8087, pp. 86–97. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bala, S., Koniński, A.: Unambiguous Automata Denoting Finitely Sequential Functions. In: Dediu, A.-H., Martín-Vide, C., Truthe, B. (eds.) LATA 2013. LNCS, vol. 7810, pp. 104–115. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Béal, M.-P., Carton, O.: Determinization of transducers over finite and infinite words. Theoretical Computer Science 289(1), 225–251 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Béal, M.-P., Carton, O., Prieur, C., Sakarovitch, J.: Squaring transducers: an efficient procedure for deciding functionality and sequentiality. Theoretical Computer Science 292(1), 45–63 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berstel, J.: Transductions and context-free languages. http://www-igm.univ-mlv.fr/berstel/ (December 2009)
  7. 7.
    Choffrut, C.: Une caractérisation des fonctions séquentielles et des fonctions sous-suentielles en tant que relations rationnelles. TCS 5(3), 325–337 (1977)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choffrut, C., Schützenberger, M.P.: Décomposition de fonctions rationnelles. In: STACS, pp. 213–226 (1986)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elgot, C.C., Mezei, J.E.: On relations defined by generalized finite automata. IBM Journal of Research and Development 9, 47–68 (1965)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Griffiths, T.V.: The unsolvability of the equivalence problem for lambda-free non-deterministic generalized machines. Journal of the ACM 15(3), 409–413 (1968)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gurari, E.M., Ibarra, O.H.: A note on finite-valued and finitely ambiguous transducers. Theory of Computing Systems 16(1), 61–66 (1983)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ibarra, O.H.: Reversal-bounded multicounter machines and their decision problems. Journal of the ACM 25(1), 116–133 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jecker, I., Filiot, E.: Multi-sequential word relations. CoRR, abs/1504.03864 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sakarovitch, J.: Elements of Automata Theory. Cambridge University Press (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sakarovitch, J., de Souza, R.: Lexicographic decomposition of k -valued transducers. Theory of Computing Systems 47(3), 758–785 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schützenberger, M.P.: Sur les relations rationnelles. In Automata Theory and Formal Languages. LNCS, vol. 33, pp. 209–213 (1975)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weber, A.: On the valuedness of finite transducers. Acta Informatica 27(8), 749–780 (1989)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weber, A.: Decomposing finite-valued transducers and deciding their equivalence. SIAM Journal on Computing 22(1), 175–202 (1993)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université Libre de BruxellesBrusselBelgium

Personalised recommendations