The Structure and Complexity of Minimal NFA's over a Unary Alphabet

Many difficult open problems in theoretical computer science center around nondeterminism. We study the fundamental problem of converting a given deterministic finite automaton (DFA) to a minimal nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA). Despite extensive work on finite automata, this fundamental problem has remained open. Recently, in [Ji91] we studied this problem and showed that this (and related) problems are computationally hard. Here we study the restriction of this problem to the case when the input DFA is over a one-letter alphabet. Even in this restricted case the problem is computationally hard even though our evidence of hardness is different from (and is weaker than) the standard ones such as NP-hardness. Let A → B denote the problem of converting a finite automaton of type A to a minimal finite automaton of type B. Our main result is that DFA → NFA, when the input is a unary cyclic DFA (a DFA whose graph is a simple cycle), is in NP but not in P unless NP ⊑ DTIME(nO(log n)). Our work was also motivated by the problem of finding structurally simple ‘normal forms’ of NFA's over a unary alphabet. We present some normal forms for minimal NFA's over a unary alphabet and present an application to lower bounds on the size complexity of an NFA. In fact, the normal form result is used in a nontrivial manner to show the NP membership result stated above.

[1]  Stephen A. Cook,et al.  The complexity of theorem-proving procedures , 1971, STOC.

[2]  Marek Chrobak,et al.  Finite Automata and Unary Languages , 1986, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[3]  Andrzej Ehrenfeucht,et al.  Complexity measures for regular expressions , 1974, STOC '74.

[4]  Oscar H. Ibarra,et al.  Relating the Type of Ambiguity of Finite Automata to the Succinctness of Their Representation , 1989, SIAM J. Comput..

[5]  Albert R. Meyer,et al.  The Equivalence Problem for Regular Expressions with Squaring Requires Exponential Space , 1972, SWAT.

[6]  R. J. Nelson,et al.  Introduction to Automata , 1968 .

[7]  A. R. Meyer,et al.  Economy of Description by Automata, Grammars, and Formal Systems , 1971, SWAT.

[8]  Tao Jiang,et al.  Minimal NFA Problems are Hard , 1991, SIAM J. Comput..

[9]  Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.  Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation , 1979 .

[10]  T. G. Szymanski,et al.  On the Equivalence, Containment, and Covering Problems for the Regular and Context-Free Languages , 1976, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[11]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[12]  David A. Plaisted.  Sparse Complex Polynomials and Polynomial Reducibility , 1977, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[13]  Leonard M. Adleman,et al.  Reducibility, randomness, and intractibility (Abstract) , 1977, STOC '77.

[14]  Harry B. Hunt,et al.  On the time and tape complexity of languages I , 1973, STOC.

[15]  Harry B. Hunt,et al.  Computational parallels between the regular and context-free languages , 1974, STOC '74.

[16]  Albert R. Meyer,et al.  Word problems requiring exponential time(Preliminary Report) , 1973, STOC.

[17]  Dexter Kozen,et al.  Lower bounds for natural proof systems , 1977, 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1977).

[18]  Dana S. Scott,et al.  Finite Automata and Their Decision Problems , 1959, IBM J. Res. Dev..