Quantum finite automata, as well as quantum pushdown automata (QPA) were first introduced by C. Moore and J. P. Crutchfield. In this paper we introduce the notion of QPA in a non-equivalent way, including unitarity criteria, by using the definition of quantum finite automata of Kondacs and Watrous. It is established that the unitarity criteria of QPA are not equivalent to the corresponding unitarity criteria of quantum Turing machines. We show that QPA can recognize every regular language. Finally we present some simple languages recognized by QPA, not recognizable by deterministic pushdown automata.
Quantum finite automata, as well as quantum pushdown automata (QPA) were first introduced by C. Moore and J. P. Crutchfield. In this paper we introduce the notion of QPA in a non-equivalent way, including unitarity criteria, by using the definition of quantum finite automata of Kondacs and Watrous. It is established that the unitarity criteria of QPA are not equivalent to the corresponding unitarity criteria of quantum Turing machines. We show that QPA can recognize every regular language. Finally we present some simple languages recognized by QPA, not recognizable by deterministic pushdown automata.
Quantum finite automata were introduced by C.Moore and J.P.Crutchfield in [MC 97] and by A.Kondacs and J.Watrous in [KW 97]. This notion is not a generalization of the deterministic finite automata, but rather a generalization of deterministic reversible (permutation) automata. In [AF 98] A.Ambainis and R.Freivalds raised the question what kind of probabilistic automata can be viewed as a special case of quantum finite automata. To answer that question and study relationship between quantum finite automata and probabilistic finite automata, we introduce a notion of probabilistic reversible automata (PRA, or doubly stochastic automata). We give the necessary condition for a language to be recognized by PRA. We find that there is a strong relationship between different possible models of PRA and corresponding models of quantum finite automata. In these thesis we regard quantum automata, probabilistic reversible and deterministic reversible automata as reversible automata. At least two non-equivalent definitions of language recognition are used for one-way reversible finite automata in various papers. Both of these definitions have their own advantages and disadvantages, summarized in our classification of one-way reversible automata. Further, we introduce a notion of quantum finite multitape automata and prove that there is a language recognized by a quantum finite multitape automaton but not by deterministic finite multitape automata. Additionally we discover unexpected probabilistic automata recognizing complicated languages. Finally, we revise the concept of quantum pushdown automata (QPA), first introduced by C.Moore and J.P.Cruthchfield in [MC 97]. We give the definition of QPA in a non-equivalent way, including unitarity criteria, by using the definition of quantum finite automata of [KW 97]. It is established that the unitary criteria of QPA are not equivalent to the corresponding unitary criteria of quantum Turing machines [BV 97]. We show that QPA can recognize every regular language. We also present some simple non-context-free languages recognized by QPA (hence not recognizable by deterministic and nondeterministic pushdown automata).
Quantum finite automata were introduced by C.Moore, J.P. Crutchfield, and by A.Kondacs and J.Watrous. This notion is not a generalization of the deterministic finite automata. Moreover, it was proved that not all regular languages can be recognized by quantum finite automata. A.Ambainis and R.Freivalds proved that for some languages quantum finite automata may be exponentially more concise rather than both deterministic and probabilistic finite automata. In this paper we introduce the notion of quantum finite multitape automata and prove that there is a language recognized by a quantum finite automaton but not by a deterministic or probabilistic finite automata. This is the first result on a problem which can be solved by a quantum computer but not by a deterministic or probabilistic computer. Additionally we discover unexpected probabilistic automata recognizing complicated languages.
Since some quantum algorithms were introduced by Shor [1] or by Grover [2], much attention has been given to the field of quantum computation.The quantum computation is so useful for solving certain problems, however, the classical computation is more powerful in some cases.Thus, it is significant to compare the ability of quantum computation with the ability of classical counterpart, based on simple computation models, like automata.In this paper, we focus on the quantum pushdown automata, QPAs, which was defined by Golovkins in 2000 [4].It is shown that the class of languages recognized by QPAs contains the class of languages recognized by finite automata.However, no one knows the relationships between the cognitive ablity of QPAs and the classical counterparts.We make a proposition in this paper, the QPAs that deterministically solve a certain problem, which cannot be solved by deterministic pushdown automata.
Even though quantum computation is useful for solving certain problems, classical computation is more powerful in some cases. Thus, it is significant to compare the abilities of quantum computation and its classical counterpart, based on such a simple computation model as automata. In this paper we focus on the quantum pushdown automata which were defined by Golovkins in 2000, who showed that the class of languages recognized by quantum pushdown automata properly contains the class of languages recognized by finite automata. However, no one knows the entire relationship between the recognitive abilities of quantum and classical pushdown automata. As a part, we show a proposition that quantum pushdown automata can deterministically solve a certain problem that cannot be solved by any deterministic pushdown automata.
One-way quantum finite automata (1QFA) proposed by Moore and Crutchfield and by Kondacs and Watrous accept only subsets of regular languages with bounded error. In this paper, we develop a new computing model of 1QFA, namely, one-way quantum finite automata together with classical states (1QFAC for short). In this model, a component of classical states is added, and the choice of unitary evolution of quantum states at each step is closely related to the current classical state. 1QFAC can accept all regular languages with no error, and in particular, 1QFAC can accept some languages with essentially less number of states than deterministic finite automata (DFA). The main technical results are as follows. (1) We prove that the set of languages accepted by 1QFAC with bounded error consists precisely of all regular languages. (2) We show that, for any prime number m ≥ 2, there exists a regular language L0(m) whose minimal DFA needs O(m) states and that can not be accepted by the 1QFA proposed by Moore and Crutchfield and by Kondacs and Watrous, but there exists 1QFAC accepting L0(m) with only constant classical states and O(log(m)) quantum basis states. Analogous results for multi-letter automata are also established. (3) By a bilinearization technique we prove that any two 1QFAC A1 and A2 are equivalent if and only if they are (k1n1) 2 + (k2n2) 2 − 1-equivalent, and there exists a polynomial-time O([(k1n1) 2 + (k2n2) 2]4) algorithm for determining their equivalence, where k1 and k2 are the numbers of classical states of A1 and A2, as well as n1 and n2 are the numbers of quantum basis states of A1 andA2, respectively. (4) We show that the minimization problem of 1QFAC is in EXPSPACE. As a corollary of this result, we obtain that the minimization problem of MO-1QFA is also in EXPSPACE. Finally, we draw some conclusions and point out open ∗Corresponding author. E-mail address: issqdw@mail.sysu.edu.cn (D. Qiu). †E-mail address: {paulo.mateus,amilcar.sernadas}@math.ist.utl.pt.
Multi-stack machines and Turing machines can simulate to each other. In this note, we give a succinct definition of multi-stack machines, and from this definition it is clearly seen that pushdown automata and deterministic finite automata are special cases of multi-stack machines. Also, with this mode of definition, pushdown automata and deterministic pushdown automata are equivalent and recognize all context-free languages. In addition, we are motivated to formulate concise definitions of quantum pushdown automata and quantum stack machines.