skip to main content
research-article

The HOM problem is decidable

Authors Info & Claims
Published:04 September 2013Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We close affirmatively a question that has been open for long time: decidability of the HOM problem. The HOM problem consists in determining, given a tree homomorphism H and a regular tree language L represented by a tree automaton, whether H(L) is regular. In order to decide the HOM problem, we develop new constructions and techniques that are interesting by themselves, and provide several significant intermediate results. For example, we prove that the universality problem is decidable for languages represented by tree automata with equality constraints, and that the equivalence and inclusion problems are decidable for images of regular languages through tree homomorphisms. Our contributions are based on the following new constructions. We describe a simple transformation for converting a tree automaton with equality constraints into a tree automaton with disequality constraints recognizing the complementary language. We also define a new class of tree automata with arbitrary disequality constraints and a particular kind of equality constraints. An automaton of this new class essentially recognizes the intersection of a tree automaton with disequality constraints and the image of a regular language through a tree homomorphism. We prove decidability of emptiness and finiteness for this class by a pumping mechanism. We combine the above constructions adequately to provide an algorithm deciding the HOM problem. This is the journal version of a paper presented in the 42nd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2010). Here, we provide all proofs and examples. Moreover, we obtain better complexity results via the modification of some proofs and a careful complexity analysis. In particular, the obtained time complexity for the decision of HOM is a tower of three exponentials.

References

  1. Baader, F. and Nipkow, T. 1998. Term Rewriting and All That. Cambridge University Press, New York. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bogaert, B., Seynhaeve, F., and Tison, S. 1999. The recognizability problem for tree automata with comparison between brothers. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures (FOSSACS). 150--164. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bogaert, B. and Tison, S. 1992. Equality and disequality constraints on direct subterms in tree automata. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS). 161--171. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Comon, H., Dauchet, M., Gilleron, R., Löding, C., Jacquemard, F., Lugiez, D., Tison, S., and Tommasi, M. 2007. Tree automata techniques and applications. http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/tata.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Comon, H. and Jacquemard, F. 1994. Ground reducibility and automata with disequality constraints. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS). 151--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Comon, H. and Jacquemard, F. 1997. Ground reducibility is EXPTIME-complete. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS). 26--34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Dauchet, M., Caron, A.-C., and Coquidé, J.-L. 1995. Automata for reduction properties solving. J. Symb. Comput. 20, 2, 215--233. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Dauchet, M., Tison, S., and Tommasi, M. 2002. Reduction de la non-linearite des morphismes d'arbres recognizable tree-languages and non-linear morphisms. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 281, 1--2, 219--233. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Engelfriet, J. 1975. Bottom-up and top-down tree transformations—a comparison. Math. Syst. Theory 9, 3, 198--231.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Fülöp, Z. 1994. Undecidable properties of deterministic top-down tree transducers. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 134, 311--328. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Gascón, A., Godoy, G., and Jacquemard, F. 2009. Closure of tree automata languages under innermost rewriting. Electronic Notes Theoret. Comput. Sci. 237, 23--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Gécseg, F. and Steinby, M. 1984. Tree Automata. Akadémiai Kiadó.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Gécseg, F. and Steinby, M. 1997. Tree languages. In Handbook of Formal Languages, G. Rozenberg and A. Salomaa, Eds., Vol. 3, Springer-Verlag, 1--68. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Gilleron, R. 1991. Decision problems for term rewriting systems and recognizable tree languages. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS). 148--159. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Gilleron, R. and Tison, S. 1995. Regular tree languages and rewrite systems. Fund. Info. 24, 1/2, 157--174. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Giménez, O., Godoy, G., and Maneth, S. 2011. Deciding regularity of the set of instances of a set of terms with regular constraints is EXPTIME-complete. SIAM J. Comput. 40, 2, 446--464. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Godoy, G., Giménez, O., Ramos, L., and àlvarez, C. 2010. The HOM problem is decidable. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC). 485--494. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Godoy, G. and Huntingford, E. 2007. Innermost-reachability and innermost-joinability are decidable for shallow term rewrite systems. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Term Rewriting and Applications (RTA). 184--199. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Godoy, G., Maneth, S., and Tison, S. 2008. Classes of tree homomorphisms with decidable preservation of regularity. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures (FOSSACS). 127--141. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Hofbauer, D. and Huber, M. 1992. Computing linearizations using test sets. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Conditional Term Rewriting Systems (CTRS). 287--301. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Kucherov, G. and Tajine, M. 1995. Decidability of regularity and related properties of ground normal form languages. Info. Compuat. 118, 91--100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. RTA-LOOP. 1991. International Conference on Rewriting Techniques and Applications. The list of open problems. http://www.lri.fr/∼rtaloop/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Schwentick, T. 2007. Automata for XML - a survey. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 73, 3, 289--315. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Suciu, D. 2002. The XML typechecking problem. SIGMOD Record 31, 1, 89--96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Thatcher, J. W. 1969. Transformations and translations from the point of view of generalized finite automata theory. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 129--142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Vágvölgyi, S. 2009. On ranges of bottom-up tree transducers. In Automata, Formal Languages, and Related Topics. 129--143.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Vágvölgyi, S. and Gilleron, R. 1992. For a rewrite system it is decidable whether the set of irreducible, ground terms is regognizable. Bull. EATCS 48, 197--209.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. The HOM problem is decidable

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image Journal of the ACM
          Journal of the ACM  Volume 60, Issue 4
          August 2013
          213 pages
          ISSN:0004-5411
          EISSN:1557-735X
          DOI:10.1145/2508028
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2013 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 4 September 2013
          • Accepted: 1 June 2013
          • Revised: 1 January 2012
          • Received: 1 September 2010
          Published in jacm Volume 60, Issue 4

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader