Finite languages and strictly local languages, Theory of Computation

Theorem The class of ?nite languages is a proper subclass of SL. Note that the class of ?nite languages is closed under union and concatenation but SL is not closed under either. Nevertheless, this does not contradict the fact that every ?nite language is SLk, for some k. All it says is that the counterexamples that establish non-closure of SL under union and concatenation must involve non-?nite languages. (You should verify the fact that they do.)

Posted Date: 3/22/2013 2:06:20 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Finite languages and strictly local languages, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Finite languages and strictly local languages, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Finite languages and strictly local languages Discussions

Write discussion on Finite languages and strictly local languages
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
Let L 3 = {a i bc j | i, j ≥ 0}. Give a strictly 2-local automaton that recognizes L 3 . Use the construction of the proof to extend the automaton to one that recognizes L 3 . Gi

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

Construct a PDA that accepts { x#y | x, y in {a, b}* such that x ? y and xi = yi for some i, 1 = i = min(|x|, |y|) }. For your PDA to work correctly it will need to be non-determin

We now add an additional degree of non-determinism and allow transitions that can be taken independent of the input-ε-transitions. Here whenever the automaton is in state 1

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


DEGENERATE OF THE INITIAL SOLUTION

We will specify a computation of one of these automata by specifying the pair of the symbols that are in the window and the remainder of the string to the right of the window at ea

Given any NFA A, we will construct a regular expression denoting L(A) by means of an expression graph, a generalization of NFA transition graphs in which the edges are labeled with

Let L1 and L2 be CGF. We show that L1 ∩ L2 is CFG too. Let M1 be a decider for L1 and M2 be a decider for L2 . Consider a 2-tape TM M: "On input x: 1. copy x on the sec