Higher-dimensional automata (HDA) are a model of concurrency that models simultaneous execution of events using higher dimensional cells. HDA recognize languages of pomsets, a generalization of finite words whose letters are partially ordered. We prove a new algebraic characterization of HDA languages: a language of pomsets is regular if and only if it is the inverse image of a functor from the category of pomsets into a finite category. Furthermore, the language is definable in first-order logic exactly when it is recognized by an aperiodic category, generalizing the McNaughton-Papert theorem to HDA languages. We also investigate a notion of counter-free HDA, and show that if a language is accepted by a counter-free HDA, it must be definable in first-order logic. The converse, however, is still open.

Higher-dimensional automata (HDAs) provide a geometric model of true concurrency, yet their standard formulation encodes an artificial total order on events. This representational artifact causes a fundamental mismatch between the combinatorial structure of HDAs and their observable behaviour, leading to logical asymmetries and complicating the application of categorical tools. In this paper, we resolve this tension by developing a semantics for HDAs that is independent of event order, based on interval ipomsets (partially ordered multisets with interfaces) that preserve only precedence and concurrency. We prove that for any HDA, the traditional ST–trace of an execution path corresponds precisely to its associated interval ipomset. On the structural side, we show that the presheaf-theoretic presentation with an unordered base and the combinatorial presentation of symmetric HDAs are categorically isomorphic. Finally, by characterizing ST- and hereditary history-preserving (hhp) bisimulation via ipomset isomorphism, we provide a unified, order-free foundation for HDA semantics. Our results resolve several ambiguities in the literature: they provide the necessary path-category structure to canonically apply the Open Maps framework, eliminate representational artifacts in temporal and modal logics, and bridge systematic mismatches between HDAs and other models of concurrency such as Petri nets.

Parikh automata extend finite automata by counters that can be tested for membership in a semilinear set, but only at the end of a run. Thereby, they preserve many of the desirable properties of finite automata. Deterministic Parikh automata are strictly weaker than nondeterministic ones, but enjoy better closure and algorithmic properties. This state of affairs motivates the study of intermediate forms of nondeterminism. Here, we investigate history-deterministic Parikh automata, i.e., automata whose nondeterminism can be resolved on the fly. This restricted form of nondeterminism is well-suited for applications which classically call for determinism, e.g., solving games and composition. We show that history-deterministic Parikh automata are strictly more expressive than deterministic ones, incomparable to unambiguous ones, and enjoy almost all of the closure properties of deterministic automata. Finally, we investigate the complexity of resolving nondeterminism in history-deterministic Parikh automata.

Parikh automata extend finite automata by counters that can be tested for membership in a semilinear set, but only at the end of a run. Thereby, they preserve many of the desirable properties of finite automata. Deterministic Parikh automata are strictly weaker than nondeterministic ones, but enjoy better closure and algorithmic properties. This state of affairs motivates the study of intermediate forms of nondeterminism. Here, we investigate history-deterministic Parikh automata, i.e., automata whose nondeterminism can be resolved on the fly. This restricted form of nondeterminism is well-suited for applications which classically call for determinism, e.g., solving games and composition. We show that history-deterministic Parikh automata are strictly more expressive than deterministic ones, incomparable to unambiguous ones, and enjoy almost all of the closure properties of deterministic automata. Finally, we investigate the complexity of resolving nondeterminism in history-deterministic Parikh automata.