1984
DOI: 10.1137/0213010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Alternating Pushdown and Stack Automata

Abstract: The classes of languages accepted by alternating pushdown automata, alternating stack automata, and alternating nonerasing stack automata, both with and without an auxiliary space bounded worktape, are characterized in terms of complexity classes defined by time bounded deterministic Turing machines. It is also shown that alternating 2-way finite state machines accept only regular languages.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Besides the traditional deterministic and nondeterministic models, alternating, probabilistic and, more recently, quantum finite automata are considered. Equivalence results point out that determinism, nondeterminism and alternation, in one-way or two-way form, exactly capture the class of regular languages [4,11,23,24]. The same happens if we consider one-way probabilistic automata working with isolated cut point [22].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Besides the traditional deterministic and nondeterministic models, alternating, probabilistic and, more recently, quantum finite automata are considered. Equivalence results point out that determinism, nondeterminism and alternation, in one-way or two-way form, exactly capture the class of regular languages [4,11,23,24]. The same happens if we consider one-way probabilistic automata working with isolated cut point [22].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Propagation nets behave much more like two-way alternating automata on finite words [5,9,3] or trees [14,6], where places are existential states and transitions are universal states. Contrary to word automata, however, propagation nets do not read an input word, but rather write several words, i.e., the tokens that are produced.…”
Section: Propagation Netsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two-way alternating automata generalize 1NFAs with the ability to move on the input string in both directions, and with the possibility to perform universal or existential moves (actually a combination of both). Formally, a two-way alternating automaton (2AFA) [21,39, It is known that 2AFAs define regular languages [39], and that, given a 2AFA with n states accepting a regular language L, one can construct a 1NFA with 2 O(n 2 ) states, accepting L (see [8,38]). In addition, by exploiting the same idea used in the reduction in [54] from 2NFAs to 1NFAs, we can show the following result.…”
Section: Two-way Alternating Automatamentioning
confidence: 99%