Advertisement

Reachability in Register Machines with Polynomial Updates

  • Alain Finkel
  • Stefan Göller
  • Christoph Haase
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8087)

Abstract

This paper introduces a class of register machines whose registers can be updated by polynomial functions when a transition is taken, and the domain of the registers can be constrained by linear constraints. This model strictly generalises a variety of known formalisms such as various classes of Vector Addition Systems with States. Our main result is that reachability in our class is PSPACE-complete when restricted to one register. We moreover give a classification of the complexity of reachability according to the type of polynomials allowed and the geometry induced by the range-constraining formula.

Keywords

Residue Class Chinese Remainder Theorem Reachability Problem Prime Number Theorem Register Machine 
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.
    Babić, D., Cook, B., Hu, A.J., Rakamarić, Z.: Proving termination of nonlinear command sequences. Formal Aspects of Computing, 1–15 (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bell, P., Potapov, I.: On undecidability bounds for matrix decision problems. Theoretical Computer Science 391(1-2), 3–13 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonnet, R.: The reachability problem for vector addition system with one zero-test. In: Murlak, F., Sankowski, P. (eds.) MFCS 2011. LNCS, vol. 6907, pp. 145–157. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bradley, A.R., Manna, Z., Sipma, H.B.: Termination of polynomial programs. In: Cousot, R. (ed.) VMCAI 2005. LNCS, vol. 3385, pp. 113–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cucker, F., Koiran, P., Smale, S.: A polynomial time algorithm for Diophantine equations in one variable. Journal of Symbolic Computation 27(1), 21–29 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dufourd, C., Finkel, A., Schnoebelen, P.: Reset nets between decidability and undecidability. In: Larsen, K.G., Skyum, S., Winskel, G. (eds.) ICALP 1998. LNCS, vol. 1443, pp. 103–115. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fearnley, J., Jurdziński, M.: Reachability in two-clock timed automata is PSPACE-complete. In: Fomin, F.V., Freivalds, R., Kwiatkowska, M., Peleg, D. (eds.) ICALP 2013, Part II. LNCS, vol. 7966, pp. 212–223. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Finkel, A., McKenzie, P., Picaronny, C.: A well-structured framework for analysing Petri net extensions. Information and Computation 195(1-2), 1–29 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fremont, D.: The reachability problem for affine functions on the integers (2012), http://web.mit.edu/~dfremont/www/reachability.pdf
  10. 10.
    Göller, S., Haase, C., Ouaknine, J., Worrell, J.: Branching-time model checking of parametric one-counter automata. In: Birkedal, L. (ed.) FOSSACS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7213, pp. 406–420. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haase, C.: On the Complexity of Model Checking Counter Automata. PhD thesis, University of Oxford, UK (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haase, C., Kreutzer, S., Ouaknine, J., Worrell, J.: Reachability in succinct and parametric one-counter automata. In: Bravetti, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) CONCUR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5710, pp. 369–383. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haase, C., Ouaknine, J., Worrell, J.: On the relationship between reachability problems in timed and counter automata. In: Finkel, A., Leroux, J., Potapov, I. (eds.) RP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7550, pp. 54–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hirst, H.P., Macey, W.T.: Bounding the roots of polynomials. The College Mathematics Journal 28(4), 292–295 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lambert, J.-L.: A structure to decide reachability in petri nets. Theoretical Computer Science 99(1), 79–104 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lipton, R.: The reachability problem is exponential-space-hard. Technical report, Yale University, New Haven, CT (1976)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mayr, E.W.: An algorithm for the general Petri net reachability problem. In: Proc. STOC, pp. 238–246. ACM, New York (1981)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Minsky, M.L.: Recursive Unsolvability of Post’s Problem of “Tag” and other Topics in Theory of Turing Machines. The Annals of Mathematics 74(3), 437–455 (1961)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reichert, J.: Personal communication (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alain Finkel
    • 1
  • Stefan Göller
    • 2
  • Christoph Haase
    • 1
  1. 1.LSV - CNRS & ENS CachanFrance
  2. 2.Institut für InformatikUniversität BremenGermany

Personalised recommendations