Active Learning of Deterministic Transducers with Outputs in Arbitrary Monoids

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2410.01590
• Title: Active Learning of Deterministic Transducers with Outputs in Arbitrary Monoids
• Author: Quentin Aristote (Université Paris Cité, CNRS, Inria, IRIF)
• Classification: cs.FL (Formal Languages and Automata Theory)
• Publication Time/Venue: Logical Methods in Computer Science, Volume 21, Issue 4, 2025 (Accepted, submitted October 2024)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.01590

Abstract

This paper investigates monoidal transducers, a class of transduction systems for deterministic automata that produce outputs in arbitrary monoids, such as those allowing output commutativity or mutual cancellation. The author employs the categorical framework of Colcombet, Petrişan, and Stabile to recover the notion of minimal transducers recognizing languages and provides necessary and sufficient conditions on the output monoid for the existence and uniqueness (up to isomorphism) of such minimal transducers. This categorical framework further provides an abstract algorithm for learning minimal transducers using membership queries and equivalence queries, and discusses practical aspects of algorithm implementation.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Definition

Traditional transducers typically produce outputs over free monoids (such as strings), but in certain application scenarios, outputs may need to satisfy algebraic properties such as commutativity or cancellation laws. For example:

1. Trace monoids in concurrency theory: Used to model execution sequences of independent tasks, where certain tasks can run asynchronously
2. Program scheduling: Transducers can be used to programmatically schedule jobs
3. Natural language processing: Certain output symbols may possess commutative properties

Research Motivation

Existing transducer learning algorithms (such as Vilar's algorithm) are primarily designed for free monoids, and direct application to non-free monoids encounters the following problems:

1. Non-termination: As shown in Lemma 1.1, Vilar's algorithm may never terminate on certain monoids
2. Efficiency issues: The approach of first learning transducers over free monoids and then minimizing introduces unnecessary states
3. Theoretical gaps: Lack of systematic theoretical framework for arbitrary monoids

Limitations of Existing Methods

• Gerdjikov's work provides minimization conditions but does not address the learning problem
• Existing learning algorithms assume outputs are in free monoids
• Lack of unified theoretical framework for handling arbitrary monoids

Core Contributions

1. Theoretical Framework Extension: Extends the categorical learning framework of Colcombet-Petrişan-Stabile to monoidal transducers
2. Existence Conditions: Provides necessary and sufficient conditions on the output monoid ensuring the existence and uniqueness of minimal monoidal transducers
3. Condition Optimization: Extends the category of Gerdjikov's minimization conditions, though complexity bounds may be worse
4. Practical Algorithm: Provides concrete implementation details for the abstract monoidal transducer learning algorithm
5. Decomposition Systems: Explains different types of consistency issues in the learning algorithm through quaternary decomposition systems

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Input:

• Input alphabet A (countable)
• Output monoid M = (M, ε, ⊗)
• Target function L: A* → M + 1 (partial function)

Output: Minimal monoidal transducer recognizing L

Query Types:

• Membership query EvalL: Given input word w, return L(w)
• Equivalence query EquivL: Given hypothesis transducer, determine correctness or return counterexample

Theoretical Foundation

Monoidal Transducer Modeling

Monoidal transducers are modeled as functors A: I → Kl(TM), where:

• I is the input category, representing the basic structure of the transducer
• Kl(TM) is the Kleisli category of monad TM
• TM X = M × X + 1 = (M × X) ⊔ {⊥}

Key Mathematical Structures

Left Greatest Common Divisor (left-gcd): For a family w = (wi)i∈I, its left gcd is the left divisor that is divisible by all other left divisors.

Reduction Function: When Kl(TM) has all countable powers of 1, there exists a function:

• lgcd: (M + 1)^N* → M (computing left gcd)
• red: (M + 1)^N* → (M + 1)^N* (reduction function)

Satisfying conditions:

• Λ = lgcd(Λ) ⊗ red(Λ)
• Uniqueness: If υ ⊗ red(Γ) = ν ⊗ red(Λ), then υ = ν and red(Γ) = red(Λ)

Existence Conditions

Theorem: Kl(TM) has all countable powers of 1 if and only if M satisfies:

1. Left Reducibility: Left reducible to left-invertible elements
2. Right Coprime Reducibility: Right coprime reducibility for left-coprime families
3. Unique Left gcd: All non-empty countable families have unique left gcd (in the right-invertible sense)

Decomposition Systems

The paper defines three decomposition systems:

• (E₁,M₁) = (Surj ∩ Inj ∩ Inv, Tot)
• (E₂,M₂) = (Surj ∩ Inj, Inv ∩ Tot)
• (E₃,M₃) = (Surj, Inj ∩ Inv ∩ Tot)

Primarily uses (E₃,M₃) to define minimal transducers, which generalizes the decomposition system in the free monoid case.

Learning Algorithm

Algorithm Framework (Algorithm 2)

Input: EvalL, EquivL
Output: Minimal transducer MinL

1. Initialize Q = T = {ε}
2. Loop until convergence:
   - Check closure condition: Does there exist qa ∈ QA such that R(q,a,·) 
     cannot be expressed as an invertible multiple of existing states?
   - Check consistency conditions: Check three types of consistency issues
   - Construct hypothesis transducer H(Q,T)
   - Submit equivalence query, process counterexamples

Consistency Conditions

The algorithm checks three types of consistency issues:

1. Completeness: R(q,a,t) ≠ ⊥ but R(q,e,T) = ⊥T
2. Divisibility: Λ(q,e) cannot left-divide Λ(q,a)R(q,a,t)
3. Compatibility: Inconsistent transduction outputs when merging states

Experimental Setup

Theoretical Verification

The paper primarily conducts theoretical analysis, verified through:

1. Complexity Analysis: Proves bounds on the number of algorithm updates
2. Termination Proof: Algorithm terminates on right-Noetherian monoids
3. Correctness Proof: Algorithm output is indeed the minimal transducer

Example Analysis

The paper demonstrates through concrete examples:

• Learning process on free monoid {α,β}*
• Differences on free commutative monoid {α,β}⊛
• Potential applications on trace monoids

Experimental Results

Complexity Bounds

Theorem 4.3: The algorithm is correct and terminates when MinL has finite state set and M is right-Noetherian. Update bounds:

• Updates to Q: At most 3|MinL|st + rk(MinL)
• Updates to T: At most rk(MinL) + |MinL|st

where rk(v) is the rank of v in M.

Comparison with Gerdjikov's Conditions

• Extensibility: This paper's conditions cover more monoid categories
• Complexity: Gerdjikov's GCLF condition provides better complexity bounds
• Applicability: This paper's method applies to certain monoids where Gerdjikov's method does not

Example Verification

Concrete transducers in Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate:

1. Detailed steps of the learning process
2. Impact of different monoid structures on results
3. Four-step minimization process (Reach→Total→Prefix→Obs)

Related Work

Transducer Theory

• Choffrut (2003): Classical transducer minimization
• Vilar (1996): Active learning algorithm for transducers
• Gerdjikov (2018): Minimization conditions for monoidal transducers

Categorical Learning Framework

• Colcombet-Petrişan-Stabile (2020): Categorical approach to automata learning
• Angluin (1987): L* algorithm
• Weighted automata learning: Bergadano-Varricchio et al.

Monoid Theory

• Trace monoids: Applications in concurrency theory
• Tropical monoids: Non-standard monoids such as (ℝ₊, 0, +)
• Groups: Monoids where all elements are invertible

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Successfully extends the categorical learning framework to monoidal transducers
2. Provides necessary and sufficient conditions for minimal transducer existence
3. Provides practical learning algorithm with complexity analysis
4. Quaternary decomposition systems provide deep understanding of algorithm steps

Limitations

1. Insufficient practical verification: Lacks validation in real-world application scenarios
2. Complexity bounds: May have worse complexity compared to Gerdjikov's method
3. Computational requirements: Requires computability of monoid operations, left gcd computation, etc.
4. Finiteness assumptions: Algorithm termination requires MinL to be finite and M to be right-Noetherian

Future Directions

1. Practical applications: Explore applications of trace monoids in job scheduling
2. n-ary decomposition systems: Generalize to more general decomposition systems
3. Finite subcategories: Study subcategories of well-behaved transducers
4. Complexity optimization: Seek better complexity bounds

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Depth: Provides rigorous mathematical foundations and complete theoretical framework
2. Methodological Innovation: Successfully extends important categorical learning framework
3. Condition Optimization: Extends known categories of minimization conditions
4. Algorithm Practicality: Provides concrete implementable algorithm description
5. Structural Insight: Quaternary decomposition systems provide deep algorithmic understanding

Weaknesses

1. Missing Experimental Validation: Primarily theoretical work lacking sufficient experimental verification
2. Vague Application Scenarios: While potential applications are mentioned, concrete practical cases are lacking
3. Complexity Trade-offs: May sacrifice complexity while extending applicability
4. Strong Computational Assumptions: High requirements for computability of monoid operations

Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution: Provides important theoretical extension to formal language theory
2. Methodological Value: Successful application of categorical methods may inspire other fields
3. Practical Potential: Provides theoretical foundation for concurrency systems, program scheduling, etc.
4. Extensibility: Framework has potential for further extension

Applicable Scenarios

1. Concurrent Systems: Applications of trace monoids in concurrent program analysis
2. Program Scheduling: Automated design of job scheduling systems
3. Symbolic Computation: Symbolic processing systems requiring algebraic properties
4. Theoretical Research: Further development of formal language and automata theory

References

The paper cites important literature from multiple fields including formal language theory, category theory, and monoid theory, including:

• Angluin (1987): Learning regular sets from queries and counterexamples
• Colcombet, Petrişan, Stabile (2020-2021): Original papers on categorical learning framework
• Gerdjikov (2018): Important work on monoidal transducer minimization
• Mac Lane (1978): Categories for the Working Mathematician

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical paper that successfully extends an important categorical learning framework to the more general setting of monoidal transducers. While lacking experimental validation, the theoretical contributions are significant and provide a solid foundation for further development in related fields. The mathematical rigor and methodological innovation of the paper are commendable.