Linear Algebra Based Bounds for One-Dimensional Cellular Automata

  • Jarkko Kari
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6808)

Abstract

One possible complexity measure for a cellular automaton is the size of its neighborhood. If a cellular automaton is reversible with a small neighborhood, the inverse automaton may need a much larger neighborhood. Our interest is to find good upper bounds for the size of this inverse neighborhood. It turns out that a linear algebra approach provides better bounds than any known combinatorial methods. We also consider cellular automata that are not surjective. In this case there must exist so-called orphans, finite patterns without a pre-image. The length of the shortest orphan measures the degree of non-surjectiveness of the map. Again, a linear algebra approach provides better bounds on this length than known combinatorial methods. We also use linear algebra to bound the minimum lengths of any diamond and any word with a non-balanced number of pre-images. These both exist when the cellular automaton in question is not surjective. All our results deal with one-dimensional cellular automata. Undecidability results imply that in higher dimensional cases no computable upper bound exists for any of the considered quantities.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hedlund, G.: Endomorphisms and automorphisms of shift dynamical systems. Mathematical Systems Theory 3, 320–375 (1969)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kari, J.: Reversibility and surjectivity problems of cellular automata. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 48, 149–182 (1994)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kari, J.: Theory of Cellular Automata: a survey. Theoretical Computer Science 334, 3–33 (2005)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Czeizler, E., Kari, J.: A tight linear bound on the neighborhood of inverse cellular automata. In: Caires, L., Italiano, G.F., Monteiro, L., Palamidessi, C., Yung, M. (eds.) ICALP 2005. LNCS, vol. 3580, pp. 410–420. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kari, J., Vanier, P., Zeume, T.: Bounds on non-surjective cellular automata. In: Královič, R., Niwiński, D. (eds.) MFCS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5734, pp. 439–450. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Moore, E.F.: Machine Models of Self-reproduction. In: Proceedings of the Symposium in Applied Mathematics, vol. 14, pp. 17–33 (1962)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Myhill, J.: The Converse to Moore’s Garden-of-Eden Theorem. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 14, 685–686 (1963)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sutner, K.: De Bruijn Graphs and Linear Cellular Automata. Complex Systems 5, 19–30 (1991)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jarkko Kari
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations