Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
Turing Machines and Equivalent Models
Deepak D’Souza
Indian Institute of Science,
Bangalore.
13 November 2019
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
Outline
1 Robustness of TM model
2 Other equivalent models
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
TM with multiple tapes
` a b b a b a a c [ [
` c a b a b b a a [ [
` a a b a b a a a [ [
Finite control
Multiple tapes (say 3), each with its own read-write head.
Each step: In current state p, read current symbols under the
tape heads, say a, b, c: Change state to q, replace current
symbols by a0 , b 0 , c 0 , and move each head left or right.
(p, a, b, c) → (q, a0 , b 0 , c 0 , L/R, L/R, L/R).
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
How a TM can simulate a multi-tape TM
Let M be given multi-tape TM. Define a TM M 0 that:
Given input w on its tape, first changes it to configuration:
`
b a b b a b a a c
` `
b [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [
`
b [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [
(−, s, −, −, −)
Simulates a single step
(p, a, b, c) → (q, a0 , b 0 , c 0 , L/R, L/R, L/R) of M by:
Scan top track to find b a, and remember it in its finite control
Similarly scan tracks 2 and 3 and remember b b and b
c in its
finite control. State looks like (−, p, a, b, c).
Now change to state (−, q, a0 , b 0 , c 0 ).
Scan track 1 to find b a, replace it by a0 , move b-mark L/R.
Similarly for tracks 2 and 3.
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
TM with two-way infinite tape
[ b b a a b a b a a a [ [
Finite control
Single two-way infinite tape.
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
Simulating a two-way infinite tape
a b a b a a [ [[ [ [ [
` [ [
[ b b a a b a b a a a [
(p, U/L)
To simulate, imagine the tape is folded to the right at some
point, and simulate with a tape alphabet Γ × Γ ∪ {`, [}.
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
The Church-Turing Thesis
Church-Turing Thesis
The definition of computability based on Turing machines,
captures the “right” notion of computability.
Turing computability coincides with several other notions of
computability proposed based on different models, in the 1930’s:
Post systems (Emil Post)
µ-recursive functions (Gödel, Herbrand)
λ-calculus (Church, Kleene)
Combinatory logic (Curry, Schönfinkel)
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
Non-deterministic TM
Similar to TM already defined, except that moves can be
non-deterministic.
M accepts an input w if
∗
(s, ` w [ω , 0) ⇒ (t, z, i),
for some z and i.
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
Simulating a non-deterministic TM by a det TM
Let M be a given non-det TM.
Define a deterministic TM M 0 that accepts the same language
as M.
M 0 uses 3 tapes: for given input, guessed binary string, work
tape to simulate run of M.
` a b b a b a a c [ [
` 0 1 0 1 0 [ [ [ [ [
` a a b b
a b a a a [ [
p
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
Simulating a non-deterministic TM by a det TM
Deterministic TM M 0 searches the tree representing the run of
M on w , by doing a BFS on the tree.
Enumerates binary strings in lexicographic order on tape 2.
Simulate M on input along the path in tape 2, on tape 3.
Accept (Enter state t) if M 0 enters t in the simulation.
Guaranteed to capture all paths and accept iff the given
non-deterministic TM accepts.
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
2-stack PDA
a
a
b a
b
b a
b a
a
a
p
` a
` a
The PDA can read the 2 top of stacks, and make a push/pop
move independently on each stack.
A 2-tape TM can easily simulate such a PDA.
Conversely, a 2-stack PDA can simulate a TM.
Robustness of TM model Other equivalent models
Counter Machines
` a a b a b a a a [ [
1
1
1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 p 1
1 1
In each step, based on the current symbol and its control state, a
2-counter machine (with counters c and d) can test c or d for zero,
or increment/decrement c/d, move L/R, and change its control
state.
A TM can easily simulate a 2-counter machine.
Conversely, a 4-counter machine can simulate a 2-stack PDA (and
hence a TM).
A 2-counter machine can simulate a 4-counter machine.
