Ask any question about EPFL courses, lectures, exercises, research, news, etc. or try the example questions below.
DISCLAIMER: The Graph Chatbot is not programmed to provide explicit or categorical answers to your questions. Rather, it transforms your questions into API requests that are distributed across the various IT services officially administered by EPFL. Its purpose is solely to collect and recommend relevant references to content that you can explore to help you answer your questions.
We use results from communication complexity, both new and old ones, to prove lower bounds for unambiguous finite automata (UFAs). We show three results. 1) Complement: There is a language L recognised by an n-state UFA such that the complement language ̅L requires NFAs with n^Ω̃(log n) states. This improves on a lower bound by Raskin. 2) Union: There are languages L₁, L₂ recognised by n-state UFAs such that the union L₁∪L₂ requires UFAs with n^Ω̃(log n) states. 3) Separation: There is a language L such that both L and ̅L are recognised by n-state NFAs but such that L requires UFAs with n^Ω(log n) states. This refutes a conjecture by Colcombet. LIPIcs, Vol. 229, 49th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2022), pages 126:1-126:13
Rachid Guerraoui, Jovan Komatovic, Manuel José Ribeiro Vidigueira
Mika Tapani Göös, Siddhartha Jain