Paper detail

Piecewise Testable Languages and Nondeterministic Automata

A regular language is $k$-piecewise testable if it is a finite boolean combination of languages of the form $Σ^* a_1 Σ^* \cdots Σ^* a_n Σ^*$, where $a_i\inΣ$ and $0\le n \le k$. Given a DFA $A$ and $k\ge 0$, it is an NL-complete problem to decide whether the language $L(A)$ is piecewise testable and, for $k\ge 4$, it is coNP-complete to decide whether the language $L(A)$ is $k$-piecewise testable. It is known that the depth of the minimal DFA serves as an upper bound on $k$. Namely, if $L(A)$ is piecewise testable, then it is $k$-piecewise testable for $k$ equal to the depth of $A$. In this paper, we show that some form of nondeterminism does not violate this upper bound result. Specifically, we define a class of NFAs, called ptNFAs, that recognize piecewise testable languages and show that the depth of a ptNFA provides an (up to exponentially better) upper bound on $k$ than the minimal DFA. We provide an application of our result, discuss the relationship between $k$-piecewise testability and the depth of NFAs, and study the complexity of $k$-piecewise testability for ptNFAs.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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.