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.
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.
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, 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.
In this note, we generalize the results of arXiv:0901.2703v1 We show that all one-way quantum finite automaton (QFA) models that are at least as general as Kondacs-Watrous QFA's are equivalent in power to classical probabilistic finite automata in this setting. Unlike their probabilistic counterparts, allowing the tape head to stay put for some steps during its traversal of the input does enlarge the class of languages recognized by such QFA's with unbounded error. (Note that, the proof of Theorem 1 in the abstract was presented in the previous version (arXiv:0901.2703v1).)
In the past year two different models of quantum finite automata have been proposed. The first model, introduced by Moore and Crutchfield[MC98], makes one measurement on its state at the end of its computation and is called a measure-once quantum finite automata. The second model, introduced by Kondacs and Watrous[KW97], makes a measurement of its state after every transition and is called a measure-many quantum finite automata. In this thesis we investigate the characteristics of the two models. We characterize measure-once quantum finite automata when they are restricted to acceptance with bounded error, and we show that, when they are not so restricted, they can solve the word problem over the free group. We show that they can be simulated by probabilistic finite automata, which implies that they are no more powerful than probabilistic finite automata. We also describe an algorithm that determines if two automata are equivalent. We show that the class of languages accepted by measure-many quantum finite automata is closed under quotient, complement, and inverse homomorphisms. We prove a necessary condition for a language to be accepted by a measure-many automaton with bounded error and we show that certain sets, including piecewise testable sets, can be accepted with bounded error by this automata.
The 2-way quantum finite automaton introduced by Kondacs and Watrous [Proceedings of the 38th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 1997, IEEE Computer Society, pp. 66--75] can accept nonregular languages with bounded error in polynomial time. If we restrict the head of the automaton to moving classically and to moving only in one direction, the acceptance power of this 1-way quantum finite automaton is reduced to a proper subset of the regular languages. In this paper we study two different models of 1-way quantum finite automata. The first model, termed measure-once quantum finite automata, was introduced by Moore and Crutchfield [Theoret. Comput. Sci., 237 (2000), pp. 275--306], and the second model, termed measure-many quantum finite automata, was introduced by Kondacs and Watrous [Proceedings of the38th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 1997, IEEE Computer Society, pp. 66--75]. We characterize the measure-once model when it is restricted to accepting with bounded error and show that, without that restriction, it can solve the word problem over the free group. We also show that it can be simulated by a probabilistic finite automaton and describe an algorithm that determines if two measure-once automata are equivalent. We prove several closure properties of the classes of languages accepted by measure-many automata, including inverse homomorphisms, and provide a new necessary condition for a language to be accepted by the measure-many model with bounded error. Finally, we show that piecewise testable sets can be accepted with bounded error by a measure-many quantum finite automaton, introducing new construction techniques for quantum automata in the process.
In this paper, we introduce 1-way and 2-way quantum finite state automata (1qfa's and 2qfa's), which are the quantum analogues of deterministic, nondeterministic and probabilistic 1-way and 2-way finite state automata. We prove the following facts regarding 2qfa's. 1. For any /spl epsiv/>0, there is a 2qfa M which recognizes the non-regular language L={a/sup m/b/sup m/|m/spl ges/1} with (one-sided) error bounded by E, and which halts in linear time. Specifically, M accepts any string in L with probability 1 and rejects any string not in L with probability at least 1-/spl epsiv/. 2. For every regular language L, there is a reversible (and hence quantum) 2-way finite state automaton which recognizes L and which runs in linear time. In fact, it is possible to define 2qfar's which recognize the non-context-free language {a/sup m/b/sup m/c/sup m/|m/spl ges/1}, based on the same technique used for 1. Consequently, the class of languages recognized by linear time, bounded error 2qfa's properly includes the regular languages. Since it is known that 2-way deterministic, nondeterministic and polynomial expected time, bounded error probabilistic finite automata can recognize only regular languages, it follows that 2qfa's are strictly more powerful than these "classical" models. In the case of 1-way automata, the situation is reversed. We prove that the class of languages recognizable by bounded error 1qfa's is properly contained in the class of regular languages.