Olmstead believed Malbolge to be a linear bounded automaton.

In 1960, Myhill introduced an automaton model today known as deterministic linear bounded automaton.

The reason this is only approximate is that within the bounds of finite memory, they are only linear bounded automaton complete.

Context-sensitive grammars are more general than context-free grammars but still orderly enough to be parsed by a linear bounded automaton.

A linear bounded automaton is a device which is more powerful than a pushdown automaton but less so than a Turing machine.

Computationally, a context-sensitive language is equivalent with a linear bounded nondeterministic Turing machine, also called a linear bounded automaton.

The problem can be shown to be PSPACE-complete by reduction from the acceptance problem for a linear bounded automaton.

In computer science, a linear bounded automaton (plural linear bounded automata, abbreviated LBA) is a restricted form of nondeterministic Turing machine.

What is neglected in this statement is that, because a real machine can only have a finite number of configurations, this "real machine" is really nothing but a linear bounded automaton.

The tape cannot be fixed in length, since that would not correspond to the given definition and would seriously limit the range of computations the machine can perform to those of a linear bounded automaton.

The languages described by these grammars are exactly all languages that can be recognized by a linear bounded automaton (a nondeterministic Turing machine whose tape is bounded by a constant times the length of the input.)

Vaughan Pratt disputed the correctness of this proof in a public list of discussion, noting that similar techniques would allow a linear bounded automaton (or LBA) to be universal, which would contradict a known non-universality result due to Noam Chomsky.

L can be shown to be a context-sensitive language by constructing a linear bounded automaton which accepts L. The language can easily be shown to be neither regular nor context free by applying the respective pumping lemmas for each of the language classes to L.

Since the size of the accessible tape is bounded by some linear function of the length of the input, the linear bounded automaton is computationally equivalent to a nondeterministic Turing machine restricted to the portion of the tape containing the input, hence the name linear bounded automaton.