snippetMinor
Is it possible to convert LBA into DFA?
Viewed 0 times
dfaconvertintopossiblelba
Problem
Today I learned about an abstract class of machines called linear bounded automata.
It is intended to model real-world computers that have a limited amount of memory. I have always thought that real computers are DFAs due to the finite memory (but the DFA is a terribly poor abstraction).
Is it possible to convert LBA into an equivalent DFA by making every possible tape configuration into a state of the DFA?
It is intended to model real-world computers that have a limited amount of memory. I have always thought that real computers are DFAs due to the finite memory (but the DFA is a terribly poor abstraction).
Is it possible to convert LBA into an equivalent DFA by making every possible tape configuration into a state of the DFA?
Solution
No, you can't do this. A single LBA can process inputs of any possible finite length. For any individual input, there are only finitely many possible tape configurations but, over all possible inputs or all possible lengths, there are there are infinitely many possible tape configurations. A finite automaton can't have one state for each of these configurations.
In particular, LBAs can accept non-regular languages, such as $\{a^nb^n\mid n\geq 0\}$ so there are LBAs that can't be converted to a single DFA.
What you could do is produce an infinite family of DFAs, one for each possible input length. Each of these would have a finite number of states. However, such an infinite family could recognize any language – even undecidable ones! – because every language contains only finitely many strings of each length and every finite language is regular.
In particular, LBAs can accept non-regular languages, such as $\{a^nb^n\mid n\geq 0\}$ so there are LBAs that can't be converted to a single DFA.
What you could do is produce an infinite family of DFAs, one for each possible input length. Each of these would have a finite number of states. However, such an infinite family could recognize any language – even undecidable ones! – because every language contains only finitely many strings of each length and every finite language is regular.
Context
StackExchange Computer Science Q#103132, answer score: 6
Revisions (0)
No revisions yet.