BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Janusz Brzozowski

Janusz Brzozowski contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Formal Languages and Automata TheoryComputational ComplexityDiscrete Mathematics

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
18works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

18 published item(s)

preprint2014arXiv

Large Aperiodic Semigroups

The syntactic complexity of a regular language is the size of its syntactic semigroup. This semigroup is isomorphic to the transition semigroup of the minimal deterministic finite automaton accepting the language, that is, to the semigroup generated by transformations induced by non-empty words on the set of states of the automaton. In this paper we search for the largest syntactic semigroup of a star-free language having $n$ left quotients; equivalently, we look for the largest transition semigroup of an aperiodic finite automaton with $n$ states. We introduce two new aperiodic transition semigroups. The first is generated by transformations that change only one state; we call such transformations and resulting semigroups unitary. In particular, we study complete unitary semigroups which have a special structure, and we show that each maximal unitary semigroup is complete. For $n \ge 4$ there exists a complete unitary semigroup that is larger than any aperiodic semigroup known to date. We then present even larger aperiodic semigroups, generated by transformations that map a non-empty subset of states to a single state; we call such transformations and semigroups semiconstant. In particular, we examine semiconstant tree semigroups which have a structure based on full binary trees. The semiconstant tree semigroups are at present the best candidates for largest aperiodic semigroups. We also prove that $2^n-1$ is an upper bound on the state complexity of reversal of star-free languages, and resolve an open problem about a special case of state complexity of concatenation of star-free languages.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Maximally Atomic Languages

The atoms of a regular language are non-empty intersections of complemented and uncomplemented quotients of the language. Tight upper bounds on the number of atoms of a language and on the quotient complexities of atoms are known. We introduce a new class of regular languages, called the maximally atomic languages, consisting of all languages meeting these bounds. We prove the following result: If L is a regular language of quotient complexity n and G is the subgroup of permutations in the transition semigroup T of the minimal DFA of L, then L is maximally atomic if and only if G is transitive on k-subsets of 1,...,n for 0 <= k <= n and T contains a transformation of rank n-1.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Upper Bounds on Syntactic Complexity of Left and Two-Sided Ideals

We solve two open problems concerning syntactic complexity: We prove that the cardinality of the syntactic semigroup of a left ideal or a suffix-closed language with $n$ left quotients (that is, with state complexity $n$) is at most $n^{n-1}+n-1$, and that of a two-sided ideal or a factor-closed language is at most $n^{n-2}+(n-2)2^{n-2}+1$. Since these bounds are known to be reachable, this settles the problems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Maximal Syntactic Complexity of Regular Languages Implies Maximal Quotient Complexities of Atoms

We relate two measures of complexity of regular languages. The first is syntactic complexity, that is, the cardinality of the syntactic semigroup of the language. That semigroup is isomorphic to the semigroup of transformations of states induced by non-empty words in the minimal deterministic finite automaton accepting the language. If the language has n left quotients (its minimal automaton has n states), then its syntactic complexity is at most n^n and this bound is tight. The second measure consists of the quotient (state) complexities of the atoms of the language, where atoms are non-empty intersections of complemented and uncomplemented quotients. A regular language has at most 2^n atoms and this bound is tight. The maximal quotient complexity of any atom with r complemented quotients is 2^n-1, if r=0 or r=n, and 1+\sum_{k=1}^{r} \sum_{h=k+1}^{k+n-r} \binom{h}{n} \binom{k}{h}, otherwise. We prove that if a language has maximal syntactic complexity, then it has 2^n atoms and each atom has maximal quotient complexity, but the converse is false.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Minimal Nondeterministic Finite Automata and Atoms of Regular Languages

We examine the NFA minimization problem in terms of atomic NFA&#39;s, that is, NFA&#39;s in which the right language of every state is a union of atoms, where the atoms of a regular language are non-empty intersections of complemented and uncomplemented left quotients of the language. We characterize all reduced atomic NFA&#39;s of a given language, that is, those NFA&#39;s that have no equivalent states. Using atomic NFA&#39;s, we formalize Sengoku&#39;s approach to NFA minimization and prove that his method fails to find all minimal NFA&#39;s. We also formulate the Kameda-Weiner NFA minimization in terms of quotients and atoms.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Most Complex Regular Right-Ideal Languages

A right ideal is a language L over an alphabet A that satisfies L = LA*. We show that there exists a stream (sequence) (R_n : n \ge 3) of regular right ideal languages, where R_n has n left quotients and is most complex under the following measures of complexity: the state complexities of the left quotients, the number of atoms (intersections of complemented and uncomplemented left quotients), the state complexities of the atoms, the size of the syntactic semigroup, the state complexities of the operations of reversal, star, and product, and the state complexities of all binary boolean operations. In that sense, this stream of right ideals is a universal witness.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Symmetric Groups and Quotient Complexity of Boolean Operations

The quotient complexity of a regular language L is the number of left quotients of L, which is the same as the state complexity of L. Suppose that L and L&#39; are binary regular languages with quotient complexities m and n, and that the transition semigroups of the minimal deterministic automata accepting L and L&#39; are the symmetric groups S_m and S_n of degrees m and n, respectively. Denote by o any binary boolean operation that is not a constant and not a function of one argument only. For m,n >= 2 with (m,n) not in {(2,2),(3,4),(4,3),(4,4)} we prove that the quotient complexity of LoL&#39; is mn if and only either (a) m is not equal to n or (b) m=n and the bases (ordered pairs of generators) of S_m and S_n are not conjugate. For (m,n)\in {(2,2),(3,4),(4,3),(4,4)} we give examples to show that this need not hold. In proving these results we generalize the notion of uniform minimality to direct products of automata. We also establish a non-trivial connection between complexity of boolean operations and group theory.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Theory of Atomata

We show that every regular language defines a unique nondeterministic finite automaton (NFA), which we call &#34;átomaton&#34;, whose states are the &#34;atoms&#34; of the language, that is, non-empty intersections of complemented or uncomplemented left quotients of the language. We describe methods of constructing the átomaton, and prove that it is isomorphic to the reverse automaton of the minimal deterministic finite automaton (DFA) of the reverse language. We study &#34;atomic&#34; NFAs in which the right language of every state is a union of atoms. We generalize Brzozowski&#39;s double-reversal method for minimizing a deterministic finite automaton (DFA), showing that the result of applying the subset construction to an NFA is a minimal DFA if and only if the reverse of the NFA is atomic. We prove that Sengoku&#39;s claim that his method always finds a minimal NFA is false.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Quotient Complexities of Atoms of Regular Languages

An atom of a regular language L with n (left) quotients is a non-empty intersection of uncomplemented or complemented quotients of L, where each of the n quotients appears in a term of the intersection. The quotient complexity of L, which is the same as the state complexity of L, is the number of quotients of L. We prove that, for any language L with quotient complexity n, the quotient complexity of any atom of L with r complemented quotients has an upper bound of 2^n-1 if r=0 or r=n, and 1+\sum_{k=1}^{r} \sum_{h=k+1}^{k+n-r} C_{h}^{n} \cdot C_{k}^{h} otherwise, where C_j^i is the binomial coefficient. For each n\ge 1, we exhibit a language whose atoms meet these bounds.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Syntactic Complexity of Finite/Cofinite, Definite, and Reverse Definite Languages

We study the syntactic complexity of finite/cofinite, definite and reverse definite languages. The syntactic complexity of a class of languages is defined as the maximal size of syntactic semigroups of languages from the class, taken as a function of the state complexity n of the languages. We prove that (n-1)! is a tight upper bound for finite/cofinite languages and that it can be reached only if the alphabet size is greater than or equal to (n-1)!-(n-2)!. We prove that the bound is also (n-1)! for reverse definite languages, but the minimal alphabet size is (n-1)!-2(n-2)!. We show that \lfloor e\cdot (n-1)!\rfloor is a lower bound on the syntactic complexity of definite languages, and conjecture that this is also an upper bound, and that the alphabet size required to meet this bound is \floor{e \cdot (n-1)!} - \floor{e \cdot (n-2)!}. We prove the conjecture for n\le 4.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Universal Witnesses for State Complexity of Basic Operations Combined with Reversal

We study the state complexity of boolean operations, concatenation and star with one or two of the argument languages reversed. We derive tight upper bounds for the symmetric differences and differences of such languages. We prove that the previously discovered bounds for union, intersection, concatenation and star of such languages can all be met by the recently introduced universal witnesses and their variants.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Universal Witnesses for State Complexity of Boolean Operations and Concatenation Combined with Star

We study the state complexity of boolean operations and product (concatenation, catenation) combined with star. We derive tight upper bounds for the symmetric differences and differences of two languages, one or both of which are starred, and for the product of two starred languages. We prove that the previously discovered bounds for the union and the intersection of languages with one or two starred arguments, for the product of two languages one of which is starred, and for the star of the product of two languages can all be met by the recently introduced universal witnesses and their variants.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Quotient Complexity of Bifix-, Factor-, and Subword-Free Regular Languages

A language L is prefix-free if, whenever words u and v are in L and u is a prefix of v, then u=v. Suffix-, factor-, and subword-free languages are defined similarly, where &#34;subword&#34; means &#34;subsequence&#34;. A language is bifix-free if it is both prefix- and suffix-free. We study the quotient complexity, more commonly known as state complexity, of operations in the classes of bifix-, factor-, and subword-free regular languages. We find tight upper bounds on the quotient complexity of intersection, union, difference, symmetric difference, concatenation, star, and reversal in these three classes of languages.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Syntactic Complexity of Prefix-, Suffix-, Bifix-, and Factor-Free Regular Languages

The syntactic complexity of a regular language is the cardinality of its syntactic semigroup. The syntactic complexity of a subclass of the class of regular languages is the maximal syntactic complexity of languages in that class, taken as a function of the state complexity $n$ of these languages. We study the syntactic complexity of prefix-, suffix-, bifix-, and factor-free regular languages. We prove that $n^{n-2}$ is a tight upper bound for prefix-free regular languages. We present properties of the syntactic semigroups of suffix-, bifix-, and factor-free regular languages, conjecture tight upper bounds on their size to be $(n-1)^{n-2}+(n-2)$, $(n-1)^{n-3} + (n-2)^{n-3} + (n-3)2^{n-3}$, and $(n-1)^{n-3} + (n-3)2^{n-3} + 1$, respectively, and exhibit languages with these syntactic complexities.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Syntactic Complexity of Star-Free Languages

The syntactic complexity of a regular language is the cardinality of its syntactic semigroup. The syntactic complexity of a subclass of regular languages is the maximal syntactic complexity of languages in that subclass, taken as a function of the state complexity of these languages. We study the syntactic complexity of star-free regular languages, that is, languages that can be constructed from finite languages using union, complement and concatenation. We find tight upper bounds on the syntactic complexity of languages accepted by monotonic and partially monotonic automata. We introduce &#34;nearly monotonic&#34; automata, which accept star-free languages, and find a tight upper bound on the syntactic complexity of languages accepted by such automata. We conjecture that this bound is also an upper bound on the syntactic complexity of star-free languages.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

On the Complexity of the Evaluation of Transient Extensions of Boolean Functions

Transient algebra is a multi-valued algebra for hazard detection in gate circuits. Sequences of alternating 0&#39;s and 1&#39;s, called transients, represent signal values, and gates are modeled by extensions of boolean functions to transients. Formulas for computing the output transient of a gate from the input transients are known for NOT, AND, OR} and XOR gates and their complements, but, in general, even the problem of deciding whether the length of the output transient exceeds a given bound is NP-complete. We propose a method of evaluating extensions of general boolean functions. We introduce and study a class of functions with the following property: Instead of evaluating an extension of a boolean function on a given set of transients, it is possible to get the same value by using transients derived from the given ones, but having length at most 3. We prove that all functions of three variables, as well as certain other functions, have this property, and can be efficiently evaluated.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Quotient Complexity of Star-Free Languages

The quotient complexity, also known as state complexity, of a regular language is the number of distinct left quotients of the language. The quotient complexity of an operation is the maximal quotient complexity of the language resulting from the operation, as a function of the quotient complexities of the operands. The class of star-free languages is the smallest class containing the finite languages and closed under boolean operations and concatenation. We prove that the tight bounds on the quotient complexities of union, intersection, difference, symmetric difference, concatenation, and star for star-free languages are the same as those for regular languages, with some small exceptions, whereas the bound for reversal is 2^n-1.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Syntactic Complexity of Ideal and Closed Languages

The state complexity of a regular language is the number of states in the minimal deterministic automaton accepting the language. The syntactic complexity of a regular language is the cardinality of its syntactic semigroup. The syntactic complexity of a subclass of regular languages is the worst-case syntactic complexity taken as a function of the state complexity $n$ of languages in that class. We study the syntactic complexity of the class of regular ideal languages and their complements, the closed languages. We prove that $n^{n-1}$ is a tight upper bound on the complexity of right ideals and prefix-closed languages, and that there exist left ideals and suffix-closed languages of syntactic complexity $n^{n-1}+n-1$, and two-sided ideals and factor-closed languages of syntactic complexity $n^{n-2}+(n-2)2^{n-2}+1$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access