Advertisement

On the log-space reducibility among array languages /preliminary version/

  • Marek Ejsmont
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 208)

Abstract

In this paper we consider a 2-dimensional array acceptor, called Turing array machine /TAM/, which is a generalization of k-tape Turing machine for string languages. By means of this automaton the complexity classes of array languages are defined. For 2-dimension array languages a generalization of log-space reducibility relation is introduced so that every language which is NL-complete is also complete for the class of array languages accepted by TAMs in log space. It is also shown that there exists array language over 1-letter alphabet which is complete for the class of array languages accepted by nondeterministic TAMs in log space. It turned out that when proving equality or inequality of the classes NL and L we face the same difficulties when proving this property for array counterparts of the above classes. At the end we introduce an array language, called projection accessibility problem /PAP/, over 1-letter alphabet, which is log-space complete and is accepted by some nondeterministic finite automaton. It follows, that if there exists any deterministic automaton with a finite number of pebbles which accepts PAP then NL=L.

Keywords

Finite Automaton Input Tape Logarithmic Space Deterministic Automaton Leftmost Point 
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. [BH 67]
    Blum,M.,Hewitt,C., Automata on 2-dimensional tape, Proc. 8th IEEE Symp. on Switching Theory,1967,pp. 155–160Google Scholar
  2. [CW 78]
    Cook, C.,R.,Wang, P.,S.,P., A Chomsky hierarchy of isotonic array grammars and languages, Comput. Graphics and Image Processing 8, 1978, 144–152Google Scholar
  3. [Ejs 84]
    Ejsmont, M., Problems in labyrinths decidable by pebble automata, Elektron. Informationsverarb. u. Kybernet. 20,1984,623–632Google Scholar
  4. [Ejs 85]
    Ejsmont,M., Array languages acceptable in logarithmic space, in polish, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Gdańsk, Institute of Mathematics,1985Google Scholar
  5. [Har 78]
    Hartmanis,J., Feasible Computations and Provable Complexity Properties, CBMS-NSF Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics 30,1978, SIAM MonographGoogle Scholar
  6. [Jon 75]
    Jones, N.,D., Space bounded reducibility among combinatorial problems, J. Comput. System Sci. 11, 1975,62–85Google Scholar
  7. [Kir 64]
    Computer interpretation of english text and picture patterns, IEEE Trans. Comput. EC-14, 1964,363–376Google Scholar
  8. [MR 72]
    Miligram, D.,L.,Rosenfeld, A., Array automata and array grammars, Information Processing 71, pp.69–74, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1972Google Scholar
  9. [Myl 72]
    Mylopoulos, J., On the recognition of topological invariants by 4-way finite automata, Comput. Graphics and Image Processing 1, 1972,308–316Google Scholar
  10. [Ros 71]
    Rosenfeld, A., Isotonic grammars, parallel grammars and picture grammars, Machine Intelligence 6, pp.281–294, American Elsevier, New York, 1971Google Scholar
  11. [Ros 76]
    Rosenfeld, A., Some notes on finite-state picture languages, Inform. Control 31,1976,177–184Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marek Ejsmont
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Applied Physics and MathematicsTechnical University of GdańskGdańskPoland

Personalised recommendations