Applying the pumping lemma, Theory of Computation

Applying the pumping lemma is not fundamentally di?erent than applying (general) su?x substitution closure or the non-counting property. The pumping lemma is a little more complicated-rather than just the single universal quanti?er ("for all languages L") and single existential quanti?er ("there exists n"), we have a nest of alternating quanti?ers (denoting "for all" as ∀ and "there exists" as ∃):

(∀L)[L regular ⇒

(∃n)[

(∀x)[x ∈ L and |x| ≥ n ⇒

(∃u, v,w)[x = uvw and

|uv| ≤ n and

|v| ≥ 1 and

(∀i ≥ 0)[uviw ∈ L]]]]].

Just as with the lemmas for the local languages, we will approach this as an adversary game. Our proof will consist of a strategy for showing that L fails to satisfy the pumping lemma. Our choices are the "for all"s; the "there exists"s are our adversary's choices. There are just a few more rounds in this game than there were in the lemmas for the local languages. The key things are being clear about which are our choices and which are the adversary's and making sure that our strategy accounts for every legal choice the adversary
might make.

The game starts with our choice of the L we wish to prove to be non regular. Our adversary then chooses some n, we choose a string x ∈ L of length at least n, etc. We win if, at the end of this process, we can choose i such that uviw ∈ L. Of course, our strategy at each step will depend on the choices our adversary has made.

What we end up with is a proof by contradiction. For instance:

To show that Lab = {ajbj| j ≥ 0} is not regular.

Posted Date: 3/21/2013 1:45:12 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Applying the pumping lemma, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Applying the pumping lemma, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Applying the pumping lemma Discussions

Write discussion on Applying the pumping lemma
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
Theorem The class of recognizable languages is closed under Boolean operations. The construction of the proof of Lemma 3 gives us a DFA that keeps track of whether or not a give

Another way of representing a strictly 2-local automaton is with a Myhill graph. These are directed graphs in which the vertices are labeled with symbols from the input alphabet of

It is not hard to see that ε-transitions do not add to the accepting power of the model. The underlying idea is that whenever an ID (q, σ  v) directly computes another (p, v) via

Find the Regular Grammar for the following Regular Expression: a(a+b)*(ab*+ba*)b.

implementation of operator precedence grammer


State and Prove the Arden's theorem for Regular Expression

how to convert a grammar into GNF

constract context free g ={ a^n b^m : m,n >=0 and n

When we say "solved algorithmically" we are not asking about a speci?c programming language, in fact one of the theorems in computability is that essentially all reasonable program