Advertisement

On the degree of ambiguity of finite automata

  • Andreas Weber
  • Helmut Seidl
Communications
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 233)

Abstract

We show that the degree of ambiguity of a nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA) with n states, if finite, is not greater than 2n·log2n + c1·n (c1 ≅ 2.0566). We present an algorithm which decides in polynomial time whether the degree of ambiguity of a NFA is finite or not. Additionally, the authors obtain in [14] a corresponding upper bound for the finite valuedness of a normalized finite transducer (NFT), and also a polynomial-time algorithm which decides whether the valuedness of a NFT is finite or not.

Keywords

Polynomial Time Short Form Sequential Machine Input String Fixed Integer 
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]
    A. Aho, J. Hopcroft, J. Ullman (1974): The Design and Analysis of Computer Algorithms. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass..Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    T.-h. Chan, O. Ibarra (1983): On the Finite-Valuedness Problem for Sequential Machines. TCS 23, pp. 95–101.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    K. Culik II, J. Karhumäki (1985): The Equivalence Problem for Single-Valued 2-Way Transducers is Decidable. Research Report, CS 85-24, University of Waterloo.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    K. Culik II, J. Karhumäki (1985): The Equivalence of Finite Valued Transducers (on HDTOL Languages) is Decidable. Technical Report, University of Waterloo.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    T. Griffiths (1968): The Unsolvability of the Equivalence Problem for ε-Free Nondeterministic Generalized Machines. JACM 15, pp. 409–413.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    E. Gurari, O. Ibarra (1983): A Note on Finite-Valued and Finitely Ambiguous Transducers. Math. Systems Theory 16, pp. 61–66.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. Harrison (1978): Introduction to Formal Language Theory. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass..Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    K. Hashiguchi (1982): Limitedness Theorem on Finite Automata with Distance Functions. JCSS 24, pp. 233–244.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. Hopcroft, J. Ullman (1979): Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass..Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    O. Ibarra, B. Ravikumar (1986): On Sparseness, Ambiguity and other Decision Problems for Acceptors and Transducers. STACS 1986, pp. 171–179.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Ch. Kintala, D. Wotschke (1980): Amounts of Nondeterminism in Finite Automata. Acta Inf. 13, pp. 199–204.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    R. Stearns, H. Hunt III (1985): On the Equivalence and Containment Problems for Unambiguous Regular Expressions, Regular Grammars, and Finite Automata. SIAM J. Comp. 14, pp. 598–611.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    L. Stockmeyer, A. Meyer (1973): Word Problems Requiring Exponential Time (Preliminary Report). Proc. 7th ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    A. Weber, H. Seidl (1985): Über die Mehrdeutigkeit und Wertigkeit von endlichen Automaten und Übersetzern. Goethe-Universität, Ffm..Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Weber
    • 1
  • Helmut Seidl
    • 1
  1. 1.Fachbereich InformatikJ. W. Goethe-UniversitätFrankfurt am MainWest Germany

Personalised recommendations