DOCSLIB.ORG

The Accidental Discovery of a Quantum Algorithm for Lattice Gauge Theories: Circa 1998

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Accidental Discovery of a Quantum Algorithm for Lattice Gauge Theories: Circa 1998 FORMULATING LATTICE FIELD THEORY FOR A QUANTUM COMPUTER* *The accidental discovery of a Quantum Algorithm for Lattice Gauge theories: Circa 1998: Rich Brower — Boston University EDS Blois June 28, 2019 ICISE Quy Nhon, Vietnam SOME REFERENCES ON EUCLIDEAN QUANTUM LINKS (AKA D-THEORY) • D. Horn, Finite Matrix Model with Continuous Local Gauge Inv. Phys. Lett. B100 (1981) • P. Orland, D. Rohrlich, Lattice Gauge Magnets: Local Isospin From Spin Nucl. Phys. B338 (1990) 647 • S. Chandrasekharan, U-J Wiese Quantum links models: A discrete approach to gauge theories Nucl. Phys. B492 (1997) • R. C. Brower, S. Chandrasekharan, U-J Wise , QCD as quantum link model, Phys. Rev D 60 (1999). • R. C. Brower, The QCD Abacus: APCTP-ICPT Conference, Seoul, Korea, May (1997) • R. C. Brower, S. Chandrasekharan, U-J Wiese, D-theory: Field quantization … discrete variable Nucl. Phys. B (2004) • David Berenstein. R. C. Brower Real Time Gauge Theory: Programming on U(1) theory on Quantum Computer. (To be pub 2019) From Bits to Qubits ? QCD Fermionic Qubit ? * See THE QCD ABACUS: A New Formulation for Lattice Gauge Theories R. C. Brower https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-lat/9711027 Lecture at ”APCTP-ICTP Joint International Conference ’97 on Recent Developments in Non-perturbative Method” May, 1997, Seoul, Korea. MIT Preprint CTP 2693. OUTLINE 1. The quantum link (or QCD abacus) Hamiltonian was introduced as a classical algorithm representing both gauge and matter fields by single bit fermion operators in an extra dimension. 2. This formalism is recast for quantum computing, as a Hamiltonian in Minkowski space for real time Qubit simulations. 3. The advantages of pseudo-fermions to implement the Jordan Wigner transformation and the Trotter expansion in local gauge invariant local kernels is discussed. 4. For U(1) compact QED the kernels on a triangular lattice are defined and a Qubit circuit implementation given to test on existing hardware. WILSON’S LATTICE QCD* 6 † g2 Tr[U⇤ + U ] Zwilson = dU e ⇤ ⇤ ZHaar P ij U ij(x, x + µ)=eiagAµ (x) i, j =1, 2, 3 SU(3) Gauge Transport on each link. Exact per site gauge invariance U⇤µ⌫ (x)=[U(x, x + µ)U(x + µ, x + µ + ⌫)][U(x, x + ⌫)U(x + ⌫,x+ ⌫ + µ)]† 1+a2iF (a4/2)F 2 + ' µ⌫ − µ⌫ ··· 45 Years Ago * K.G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974), 2445. THE CLASSICAL COMPETITION Ken Wilson Lattice 1989 Capri “One lesson is that lattice gauge theory could also require a 10^8 increase in computer power AND specular algorithmic advance before useful interaction with experiment” • ab initio Chemistry • ab initio QCD 1. 1930+50 = 1980 vs 1. 1980 + 50 = 2030?* 2. 0.1 flops ➔ 10 Mflops 2. 10 Mflops ➔ 1000 Tflops 3. Gaussian Basis functions 3. Clever Collective Variable? Lattice QCD has arrived 10 years early ! TODAY Oak Ridge National Laboratory's 200 petaflop supercomputer “Lattice Gauge Theory Machine” 200,000,000,000,000,000 Floats/sec 9,216 IBM POWER9 CPUs and 27648 NVIDIA GPUs Each GPU has 5120 Cores and total of 580,608,000,000,000 transistors BUT WILSON’S LGT CAN NOT DO IT ALL: (SOME OUT STANDING PROBLEMS!) • Problem 1: LGT on curved Riemann Manifolds*: e.g. CFT on boundary of Anti-de-Sitter space. Quantum Finite Elements should solve this? • Problem 2: Chiral Gauge Theories#: Many be topological methods in extra dimension? • Problem 3 : Minkowski Space is exponential hard @: e.g.real time jets, scattering, sign problem of baryon chemical pot at finite T etc. *https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.08587 Dirac Fermions on Simplicial Manifold https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.08512 Phi 4th on Riemannian Manifold # https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.11171 A non-Perturbative Definition of the Standard Model ? @ This workshop? Richard Feynman On quantum physics and computer simulation “There is plenty of room to make [computers] smaller. nothing that I can see in the physical laws . says the computer elements cannot be made enormously smaller than they are now. In fact, there may be certain advantages. —1959” 60 years ago! “trying to find a computer simulation of physics seems to me to be an excellent program to follow out. the real use of it would be with quantum mechanics. Nature isn’t classical . and if you want to make a simulation of Nature, you’d better make it quantum mechanical, and by golly it’s a wonderful problem, because it doesn’t look so easy. —1981” TODAY Superconducting QIS plattform Intel 49 qubit device Rigetti 19 qubit device IBM 50 qubit device Cloud quantum computing Google 72 qubit device Resources: 100,000,000,000,000 VND Nikolai Lauk, Aspen 2019 Universality == Many equivalent LFT • Different space-time + field discretizations define exactly the same continuum quantum field theory • eg. Lattice different lattice give identical c = 1/2 CFT — square, triangle or spherical lattice! • Fields: Continuum phi 4th field and single bit Ising fields are equivalent s 1 φx R 2 ± () 2 • Bosonic Sine Gordon Theory = Fermionic Thirring Theory • N = 4 SUSY is dual AdS Gravity WARM UP: O(3) HEISENBERG SPIN MODEL Classical O(3) MODEL Quantum antiferromagnet O(3) MODEL β 1 ~ ~ Z = dS exp[ S~ S~ ] g2 x,µ x x+µ g2 x · y Tr[e− · ] Z x,y ! hXi P Warm up with Fermionic Quantum Operator ij ij S~ a†(x)σ a (x) or Sˆ (x)=a†(x)a (x) x ! i j i j a (x),a†(x) = δ δ , a†(x)a†(x) =0 , a (x),a (x) =0 { i j } ij xy { i j } { i j } Z =Trexp( βHˆ ). Hˆ = Tr[Sˆ Sˆ ] ,Tr[Sˆ ]=0 − x y x x,y hXi Global Rotation: J~ = Tr[~ Sˆ ]= [J,~ Hˆ ]=0 B.B. Beard and U-J Wiese x x ) Local Fermion No: Fˆ = Tr[Sˆ ]= [Fˆ , Hˆ ]=0 https://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/9602164 Px x ) x KOGUT SUSKIND HAMILTONIAN 2 g 2 2 1 H = (Tr[E (x, µ)] + Tr[E (x, µ)]) Tr[U + U † ] 2 L R − 2g2 ⇤ ⇤ x,x+µ h X i X⇤ d Example: U(1) Abelian P/Q symplectic E = i ,U= exp[i✓] operators in Q-basis are d✓ U(N) generalization of Gauge Algebra is ij ij ↵ ↵ β ↵γ ↵ E λ↵ E = [E ,E ]=2if E ⌘ ) [E ,U]= E U,[E ,U]= UE L − L R − R ER = U †ELU,[U, U †]=0 UU† =1 D-THEORY: FERMIONS FOR GAUGE, SCALAR AND DIRAC LATTICE FIELDS! d-dimensional ordinary lattice field theory Z =Trexp( βHˆ ). − (d+1)-dimensional D-theory Original Motivation: MAKE Easy Bosonic into Hard Fermionic Theories may have smart cluster (aka worm) algorithms? ⇠ =1/am exp[cβ/g2] ⇠ Asymptotic Freedom of 2d spin and 4d gauge implies exponential dimensional reduction as β !1 see Square-Lattice Heisenberg Antiferromagnet at Very Large Correlation Lengths B. B. Beard, R. J. Birgeneau, M. Greven, and U.-J. Wiese Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 1742 (1998) OPERATOR QUANTUM GAUGE LINK On each link (x,x + µ)introduce2Nccomplex fermion a,ai† right(+) moving and bj,bj† left(-) moving fluxon a LINK: i bj† U (x, x + µ) Uˆ = a (x) b†(x + µ) ij ! ij i j x x + µ a ,a† = δ b ,b† = δ { i j} ij { i j} ij Local Gaue Operators ⌦ (x)=a†(x)a (x)+ ij i j ··· aia† aib† For SU(3) QCD have SU(6) per Link Lie Algebra j j "biaj† bibj† # Hilbert Space is a large qubit array of color vectors in 4d space-time QC MINKOWSKI DYAMICS • Change 4-th axis to real Time for Hamiltonian. • Let short 5-th axis be field space (like “Domain Wall Fermion flavors) x +ˆn β LINK ˆ Uij [Eˆ , Uˆ]= Uˆ ± Eˆij(x, x +ˆn) ± Time nˆ =1, 2, 3 x 1 2 2 2 ˆ ˆ ˆ † ˆ ˆ H0 = Tr[U⇤ + U ]+g Tr[E+(x, y)+E (x, y] + quarks −4g2 ⇤ − x,y X⇤ hXi FERMIONIC QUBIT GATES Each Fermion On Each qubit a†(↵ 1 + β 0 )=β 1 a(↵ 1 + β 0 )=↵ 0 | i | i | i | i | i | i 01 2 1 11 a† + a = X = (a + a†) 1= H = ) 10 − ) p2 11 − 0 i 10 (a† + a)/i = Y = − (2a†a 1) = Z = ) i 0 − ) 0 1 − A A | i | i (1 a†a)+a†a(b + b†)= ContrNOT B A B − ) | i | ⇥ i (1 a†ab†b)+a†ab†b(c† + c)= To↵oli − ) Classical Reversible Computing Conserving Energy R. Landauer IBM J journal of Research and Development, vol. 5, pp. 183-191, 1961 WHAT ABOUT ANTI-SYMMETRIC FERMIONIC FOCK SPACE? Step #1: PARA-STATISTICS: D-Theory only require anti-commutator within each a’s and b’s set 0 [ai†aj,ap† bq]=[ai†aj,ap† ] bq + ap† [ai†aj,bq] = [E ,U]= E U same for a —> b ) L − L Step #2; Jordan-Wigner: Apply to Locally to each set of 3 a's and b's. + z + z z + a† = σ ,a† = σ σ ,a† = σ σ σ same for a —> b 1 1 2 − 1 2 3 1 2 3 PARA-STATISTICS & JORDAN-WIGNER TO THE RESCUE STARTING TO TEST REAL TIME QUBIT ALGORITHM FOR U(1) QUANTUM LINK GAUGE THEORY Joint Work with D. Berenstein (UCSB), Cameron Valier (BU) & H. Kawai (BU) 2 e z z 2 + + Hˆ = (σ + σ ) + ↵ [σ σ− + σ− σ ] 2 s s+1 s ⌦ s+1 s ⌦ s+1 links,sX links,sX 1 + + + [σ σ σ + σ− σ− σ−] − 2e2 s ⌦ s ⌦ s s ⌦ s ⌦ s ,s X4 Few very simple kernels in Trotter factorization into Gauge invariant Unitary operators with very few Qubit width Choose 2 + 1 on U(1) Hamiltonian on a Triangular spacial lattice To evaluate lattice: alternate between two coloring of triangles.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Simulating Quantum Field Theory with a Quantum Computer
    Simulating quantum field theory with a quantum computer John Preskill Lattice 2018 28 July 2018 This talk has two parts (1) Near-term prospects for quantum computing. (2) Opportunities in quantum simulation of quantum field theory. Exascale digital computers will advance our knowledge of QCD, but some challenges will remain, especially concerning real-time evolution and properties of nuclear matter and quark-gluon plasma at nonzero temperature and chemical potential. Digital computers may never be able to address these (and other) problems; quantum computers will solve them eventually, though I’m not sure when. The physics payoff may still be far away, but today’s research can hasten the arrival of a new era in which quantum simulation fuels progress in fundamental physics. Frontiers of Physics short distance long distance complexity Higgs boson Large scale structure “More is different” Neutrino masses Cosmic microwave Many-body entanglement background Supersymmetry Phases of quantum Dark matter matter Quantum gravity Dark energy Quantum computing String theory Gravitational waves Quantum spacetime particle collision molecular chemistry entangled electrons A quantum computer can simulate efficiently any physical process that occurs in Nature. (Maybe. We don’t actually know for sure.) superconductor black hole early universe Two fundamental ideas (1) Quantum complexity Why we think quantum computing is powerful. (2) Quantum error correction Why we think quantum computing is scalable. A complete description of a typical quantum state of just 300 qubits requires more bits than the number of atoms in the visible universe. Why we think quantum computing is powerful We know examples of problems that can be solved efficiently by a quantum computer, where we believe the problems are hard for classical computers.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometric Algorithms
    Geometric Algorithms primitive operations convex hull closest pair voronoi diagram References: Algorithms in C (2nd edition), Chapters 24-25 http://www.cs.princeton.edu/introalgsds/71primitives http://www.cs.princeton.edu/introalgsds/72hull 1 Geometric Algorithms Applications. • Data mining. • VLSI design. • Computer vision. • Mathematical models. • Astronomical simulation. • Geographic information systems. airflow around an aircraft wing • Computer graphics (movies, games, virtual reality). • Models of physical world (maps, architecture, medical imaging). Reference: http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/geom.html History. • Ancient mathematical foundations. • Most geometric algorithms less than 25 years old. 2 primitive operations convex hull closest pair voronoi diagram 3 Geometric Primitives Point: two numbers (x, y). any line not through origin Line: two numbers a and b [ax + by = 1] Line segment: two points. Polygon: sequence of points. Primitive operations. • Is a point inside a polygon? • Compare slopes of two lines. • Distance between two points. • Do two line segments intersect? Given three points p , p , p , is p -p -p a counterclockwise turn? • 1 2 3 1 2 3 Other geometric shapes. • Triangle, rectangle, circle, sphere, cone, … • 3D and higher dimensions sometimes more complicated. 4 Intuition Warning: intuition may be misleading. • Humans have spatial intuition in 2D and 3D. • Computers do not. • Neither has good intuition in higher dimensions! Is a given polygon simple? no crossings 1 6 5 8 7 2 7 8 6 4 2 1 1 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 2 18 4 18 4 19 4 19 4 20 3 20 3 20 1 10 3 7 2 8 8 3 4 6 5 15 1 11 3 14 2 16 we think of this algorithm sees this 5 Polygon Inside, Outside Jordan curve theorem.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Computational Social Choice
    1 Introduction to Computational Social Choice Felix Brandta, Vincent Conitzerb, Ulle Endrissc, J´er^omeLangd, and Ariel D. Procacciae 1.1 Computational Social Choice at a Glance Social choice theory is the field of scientific inquiry that studies the aggregation of individual preferences towards a collective choice. For example, social choice theorists|who hail from a range of different disciplines, including mathematics, economics, and political science|are interested in the design and theoretical evalu- ation of voting rules. Questions of social choice have stimulated intellectual thought for centuries. Over time the topic has fascinated many a great mind, from the Mar- quis de Condorcet and Pierre-Simon de Laplace, through Charles Dodgson (better known as Lewis Carroll, the author of Alice in Wonderland), to Nobel Laureates such as Kenneth Arrow, Amartya Sen, and Lloyd Shapley. Computational social choice (COMSOC), by comparison, is a very young field that formed only in the early 2000s. There were, however, a few precursors. For instance, David Gale and Lloyd Shapley's algorithm for finding stable matchings between two groups of people with preferences over each other, dating back to 1962, truly had a computational flavor. And in the late 1980s, a series of papers by John Bartholdi, Craig Tovey, and Michael Trick showed that, on the one hand, computational complexity, as studied in theoretical computer science, can serve as a barrier against strategic manipulation in elections, but on the other hand, it can also prevent the efficient use of some voting rules altogether. Around the same time, a research group around Bernard Monjardet and Olivier Hudry also started to study the computational complexity of preference aggregation procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • Randnla: Randomized Numerical Linear Algebra
    review articles DOI:10.1145/2842602 generation mechanisms—as an algo- Randomization offers new benefits rithmic or computational resource for the develop ment of improved algo- for large-scale linear algebra computations. rithms for fundamental matrix prob- lems such as matrix multiplication, BY PETROS DRINEAS AND MICHAEL W. MAHONEY least-squares (LS) approximation, low- rank matrix approxi mation, and Lapla- cian-based linear equ ation solvers. Randomized Numerical Linear Algebra (RandNLA) is an interdisci- RandNLA: plinary research area that exploits randomization as a computational resource to develop improved algo- rithms for large-scale linear algebra Randomized problems.32 From a foundational per- spective, RandNLA has its roots in theoretical computer science (TCS), with deep connections to mathemat- Numerical ics (convex analysis, probability theory, metric embedding theory) and applied mathematics (scientific computing, signal processing, numerical linear Linear algebra). From an applied perspec- tive, RandNLA is a vital new tool for machine learning, statistics, and data analysis. Well-engineered implemen- Algebra tations have already outperformed highly optimized software libraries for ubiquitous problems such as least- squares,4,35 with good scalability in par- allel and distributed environments. 52 Moreover, RandNLA promises a sound algorithmic and statistical foundation for modern large-scale data analysis. MATRICES ARE UBIQUITOUS in computer science, statistics, and applied mathematics. An m × n key insights matrix can encode information about m objects ˽ Randomization isn’t just used to model noise in data; it can be a powerful (each described by n features), or the behavior of a computational resource to develop discretized differential operator on a finite element algorithms with improved running times and stability properties as well as mesh; an n × n positive-definite matrix can encode algorithms that are more interpretable in the correlations between all pairs of n objects, or the downstream data science applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Mechanism, Mentalism, and Metamathematics Synthese Library
    MECHANISM, MENTALISM, AND METAMATHEMATICS SYNTHESE LIBRARY STUDIES IN EPISTEMOLOGY, LOGIC, METHODOLOGY, AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Managing Editor: JAAKKO HINTIKKA, Florida State University Editors: ROBER T S. COHEN, Boston University DONALD DAVIDSON, University o/Chicago GABRIEL NUCHELMANS, University 0/ Leyden WESLEY C. SALMON, University 0/ Arizona VOLUME 137 JUDSON CHAMBERS WEBB Boston University. Dept. 0/ Philosophy. Boston. Mass .• U.S.A. MECHANISM, MENT ALISM, AND MET AMA THEMA TICS An Essay on Finitism i Springer-Science+Business Media, B.V. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Webb, Judson Chambers, 1936- CII:J Mechanism, mentalism, and metamathematics. (Synthese library; v. 137) Bibliography: p. Includes indexes. 1. Metamathematics. I. Title. QA9.8.w4 510: 1 79-27819 ISBN 978-90-481-8357-9 ISBN 978-94-015-7653-6 (eBook) DOl 10.1007/978-94-015-7653-6 All Rights Reserved Copyright © 1980 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht Originally published by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland in 1980. Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1980 No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any informational storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE vii INTRODUCTION ix CHAPTER I / MECHANISM: SOME HISTORICAL NOTES I. Machines and Demons 2. Machines and Men 17 3. Machines, Arithmetic, and Logic 22 CHAPTER II / MIND, NUMBER, AND THE INFINITE 33 I. The Obligations of Infinity 33 2. Mind and Philosophy of Number 40 3. Dedekind's Theory of Arithmetic 46 4.
    [Show full text]
  • A Mathematical Analysis of Student-Generated Sorting Algorithms Audrey Nasar
    The Mathematics Enthusiast Volume 16 Article 15 Number 1 Numbers 1, 2, & 3 2-2019 A Mathematical Analysis of Student-Generated Sorting Algorithms Audrey Nasar Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/tme Recommended Citation Nasar, Audrey (2019) "A Mathematical Analysis of Student-Generated Sorting Algorithms," The Mathematics Enthusiast: Vol. 16 : No. 1 , Article 15. Available at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/tme/vol16/iss1/15 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Mathematics Enthusiast by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TME, vol. 16, nos.1, 2&3, p. 315 A Mathematical Analysis of student-generated sorting algorithms Audrey A. Nasar1 Borough of Manhattan Community College at the City University of New York Abstract: Sorting is a process we encounter very often in everyday life. Additionally it is a fundamental operation in computer science. Having been one of the first intensely studied problems in computer science, many different sorting algorithms have been developed and analyzed. Although algorithms are often taught as part of the computer science curriculum in the context of a programming language, the study of algorithms and algorithmic thinking, including the design, construction and analysis of algorithms, has pedagogical value in mathematics education. This paper will provide an introduction to computational complexity and efficiency, without the use of a programming language. It will also describe how these concepts can be incorporated into the existing high school or undergraduate mathematics curriculum through a mathematical analysis of student- generated sorting algorithms.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Modern Numerical Linear Algebra
    Gene Golub, Stanford University 1 A History of Modern Numerical Linear Algebra Gene H. Golub Stanford University Gene Golub, Stanford University 2 What is Numerical Analysis? (a.k.a Scientific Computing) The definitions are becoming shorter... Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (1973): • ”The study of quantitative approximations to the solutions of mathematical problems including consideration of the errors and bounds to the errors involved.” The American Heritage Dictionary (1992): • ”The study of approximate solutions to mathematical problems, taking into account the extent of possible errors.” L. N. Trefethen, Oxford University (1992): • ”The study of algorithms for the problems of continuous mathematics.” Gene Golub, Stanford University 3 Numerical Analysis: How It All Started Numerical analysis motivated the development of the earliest computers. Ballistics • Solution of PDE’s • Data Analysis • Early pioneers included: J. von Neumann, A. M. Turing In the beginning... von Neumann & Goldstine (1947): ”Numerical Inversion of Matrices of High Order” Gene Golub, Stanford University 4 Numerical Linear Algebra Numerical Linear Algebra (NLA) is a small but active area of research: Less than 200 active, committed persons. But the community involves many scientists. Gene Golub, Stanford University 5 Top Ten Algorithms in Science (Jack Dongarra, 2000) 1. Metropolis Algorithm for Monte Carlo 2. Simplex Method for Linear Programming 3. Krylov Subspace Iteration Methods 4. The Decompositional Approach to Matrix Computations 5. The Fortran Optimizing Compiler 6. QR Algorithm for Computing Eigenvalues 7. Quicksort Algorithm for Sorting 8. Fast Fourier Transform 9. Integer Relation Detection 10. Fast Multipole Method Red: Algorithms within the exclusive domain of NLA research. • Blue: Algorithms strongly (though not exclusively) connected to NLA research.
    [Show full text]
  • Complexity of Some Problems from the Theory of Automata
    INFORMATION AND CONTROL 66, 163-176 (1985) Complexity of Some Problems from the Theory of Automata JACQUES STERN DOpartement de Mathdmatiques, UniversitO de Caen, Caen, France INTRODUCTION 1.1. Given a finite alphabet L', the regular events over X are those accepted by a finite-state automaton. By Kleene's theorem, a subset W of S* is a regular event if and only if it can be constructed from the finite- word sets by boolean operations together with concatenation and *- operation. In some sense, the regular events are quite simple because they are accepted by a machine with no storage capacity. Nevertheless, in recent years, much attention has been paid to special subclasses of the class of regular events; in this paper, we shall be concerned with star-free events, events of dot-depth one and piecewise testable events. Star-free events are constructed like regular events from the finite-word sets but with the restriction that the *-operation is not allowed; .events of dot-depth one and piecewise testable events are star free of a very simple form and will be defined below; star-free events have been characterized in the work of Schiitzenberger (1965) in terms of their syntactic monoid; algebraic characterizations of the other two classes have been given (Simon, 1975; Knast, 1983). From an algorithmic point of view, these algebraic characterizations do not yield efficient procedures because computing the syntactic monoid of a regular event given, e.g., by an automaton is obviously time consuming. In this paper, we investigate the complexity of three problems which we now describe in the style of (Garey and Johnson, 1979).
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Theory of Computation Some Notes for CIS262
    Introduction to the Theory of Computation Some Notes for CIS262 Jean Gallier Department of Computer and Information Science University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA e-mail: [email protected] c Jean Gallier Please, do not reproduce without permission of the author December 26, 2017 2 Contents 1 Introduction 7 2 Basics of Formal Language Theory 9 2.1 Alphabets,Strings,Languages . .. 9 2.2 OperationsonLanguages. .. .. 15 3 DFA’s, NFA’s, Regular Languages 19 3.1 Deterministic Finite Automata (DFA’s) . 20 3.2 The“Cross-product”Construction . ... 25 3.3 Nondeteterministic Finite Automata (NFA’s) . .. 27 3.4 ǫ-Closure...................................... 30 3.5 ConvertinganNFAintoaDFA ......................... 32 3.6 Finite State Automata With Output: Transducers . .... 36 3.7 An Application of NFA’s: Text Search . 40 4 Hidden Markov Models (HMMs) 45 4.1 HiddenMarkovModels(HMMs). 45 4.2 The Viterbi Algorithm and the Forward Algorithm . 58 5 Regular Languages, Minimization of DFA’s 67 5.1 DirectedGraphsandPaths ........................... 67 5.2 LabeledGraphsandAutomata ......................... 70 5.3 The Closure Definition of the Regular Languages . .. 72 5.4 RegularExpressions ............................... 75 5.5 RegularExpressionsandRegularLanguages . ... 76 5.6 RegularExpressionsandNFA’s . .. .. 78 5.7 Applications of Regular Expressions . 86 5.8 Summary of Closure Properties of the Regular Languages . ...... 87 5.9 Right-Invariant Equivalence Relations on Σ∗ .................. 88 5.10 Finding minimal DFA’s . 98 5.11 State Equivalence and Minimal DFA’s . 100 5.12ThePumpingLemma............................... 111 5.13 A Fast Algorithm for Checking State Equivalence . 115 3 4 CONTENTS 6 Context-Free Grammars And Languages 127 6.1 Context-FreeGrammars . .. .. 127 6.2 DerivationsandContext-FreeLanguages .
    [Show full text]
  • Warren Goldfarb, Notes on Metamathematics
    Notes on Metamathematics Warren Goldfarb W.B. Pearson Professor of Modern Mathematics and Mathematical Logic Department of Philosophy Harvard University DRAFT: January 1, 2018 In Memory of Burton Dreben (1927{1999), whose spirited teaching on G¨odeliantopics provided the original inspiration for these Notes. Contents 1 Axiomatics 1 1.1 Formal languages . 1 1.2 Axioms and rules of inference . 5 1.3 Natural numbers: the successor function . 9 1.4 General notions . 13 1.5 Peano Arithmetic. 15 1.6 Basic laws of arithmetic . 18 2 G¨odel'sProof 23 2.1 G¨odelnumbering . 23 2.2 Primitive recursive functions and relations . 25 2.3 Arithmetization of syntax . 30 2.4 Numeralwise representability . 35 2.5 Proof of incompleteness . 37 2.6 `I am not derivable' . 40 3 Formalized Metamathematics 43 3.1 The Fixed Point Lemma . 43 3.2 G¨odel'sSecond Incompleteness Theorem . 47 3.3 The First Incompleteness Theorem Sharpened . 52 3.4 L¨ob'sTheorem . 55 4 Formalizing Primitive Recursion 59 4.1 ∆0,Σ1, and Π1 formulas . 59 4.2 Σ1-completeness and Σ1-soundness . 61 4.3 Proof of Representability . 63 3 5 Formalized Semantics 69 5.1 Tarski's Theorem . 69 5.2 Defining truth for LPA .......................... 72 5.3 Uses of the truth-definition . 74 5.4 Second-order Arithmetic . 76 5.5 Partial truth predicates . 79 5.6 Truth for other languages . 81 6 Computability 85 6.1 Computability . 85 6.2 Recursive and partial recursive functions . 87 6.3 The Normal Form Theorem and the Halting Problem . 91 6.4 Turing Machines .
    [Show full text]
  • Finite-State Automata and Algorithms
    Finite-State Automata and Algorithms Bernd Kiefer, [email protected] Many thanks to Anette Frank for the slides MSc. Computational Linguistics Course, SS 2009 Overview . Finite-state automata (FSA) – What for? – Recap: Chomsky hierarchy of grammars and languages – FSA, regular languages and regular expressions – Appropriate problem classes and applications . Finite-state automata and algorithms – Regular expressions and FSA – Deterministic (DFSA) vs. non-deterministic (NFSA) finite-state automata – Determinization: from NFSA to DFSA – Minimization of DFSA . Extensions: finite-state transducers and FST operations Finite-state automata: What for? Chomsky Hierarchy of Hierarchy of Grammars and Languages Automata . Regular languages . Regular PS grammar (Type-3) Finite-state automata . Context-free languages . Context-free PS grammar (Type-2) Push-down automata . Context-sensitive languages . Tree adjoining grammars (Type-1) Linear bounded automata . Type-0 languages . General PS grammars Turing machine computationally more complex less efficient Finite-state automata model regular languages Regular describe/specify expressions describe/specify Finite describe/specify Regular automata recognize languages executable! Finite-state MACHINE Finite-state automata model regular languages Regular describe/specify expressions describe/specify Regular Finite describe/specify Regular grammars automata recognize/generate languages executable! executable! • properties of regular languages • appropriate problem classes Finite-state • algorithms for FSA MACHINE Languages, formal languages and grammars . Alphabet Σ : finite set of symbols Σ . String : sequence x1 ... xn of symbols xi from the alphabet – Special case: empty string ε . Language over Σ : the set of strings that can be generated from Σ – Sigma star Σ* : set of all possible strings over the alphabet Σ Σ = {a, b} Σ* = {ε, a, b, aa, ab, ba, bb, aaa, aab, ...} – Sigma plus Σ+ : Σ+ = Σ* -{ε} Strings – Special languages: ∅ = {} (empty language) ≠ {ε} (language of empty string) .
    [Show full text]
  • Mathematics 1
    Mathematics 1 MATH 1109. Math for Business: Calculus. (3 Credits) MATHEMATICS This course provides business majors with an introduction to differential and integral calculus. Topics include differentiation, integration, and their applications, in particular derivatives of polynomials, rational, exponential Courses and logarithmic functions; curve sketching, optimization problems; Our Courses and the definite integral. Applications are drawn from business and economics. This course is open only to students in the Gabelli School of MATH 1000. Precalculus. (3 Credits) Business. In this course, students will be introduced to a rigorous treatment of the mathematics necessary to succeed in calculus. Topics include intervals, MATH 1198. Honors Business Math. (4 Credits) equations, inequalities, functions, operations on functions, inverse Topics covered in this course include elements of multivariable calculus, functions, graphing polynomial functions, exponential and logarithmic solutions of systems of linear equations, discrete and continuous functions, trigonometric functions, and identities. This course does not probability, and applications to business. Note: Four-credit courses that fulfill the mathematical/computational reasoning core requirement. meet for 150 minutes per week require three additional hours of class preparation per week on the part of the student in lieu of an additional MATH 1001. Math for Business: Precalculus. (3 Credits) hour of formal instruction. This course is designed to prepare students in the Gabelli School of Business for Math for Business: Calculus. Topics include inequalities; MATH 1200. Topics in Finite Mathematics. (1 Credit) linear, polynomial, rational, exponential, logarithm and inverse functions This course covers basic concepts of finite mathematics: counting and their graphs; distance, lengths, and area of simple regions. This techniques including Venn diagrams, permutations, combinations, course does not satisfy the mathematical/computation reasoning core probability, and Bayes' theorem.
    [Show full text]