Paper detail

Bisimilarity on Basic Process Algebra is in 2-ExpTime (an explicit proof)

Burkart, Caucal, Steffen (1995) showed a procedure deciding bisimulation equivalence of processes in Basic Process Algebra (BPA), i.e. of sequential processes generated by context-free grammars. They improved the previous decidability result of Christensen, Hüttel, Stirling (1992), since their procedure has obviously an elementary time complexity and the authors claim that a close analysis would reveal a double exponential upper bound. Here a self-contained direct proof of the membership in 2-ExpTime is given. This is done via a Prover-Refuter game which shows that there is an alternating Turing machine deciding the problem in exponential space. The proof uses similar ingredients (size-measures, decompositions, bases) as the previous proofs, but one new simplifying factor is an explicit addition of infinite regular strings to the state space. An auxiliary claim also shows an explicit exponential upper bound on the equivalence level of nonbisimilar normed BPA processes. The importance of clarifying the 2-ExpTime upper bound for BPA bisimilarity has recently increased due to the shift of the known lower bound from PSpace (Srba, 2002) to ExpTime (Kiefer, 2012).

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.