Finite state automata, Theory of Computation

Since the signi?cance of the states represented by the nodes of these transition graphs is arbitrary, we will allow ourselves to use any ?nite set (such as {A,B,C,D,E, F,G,H} or even pairs of the sort we used to label the LTk transition graphs) to represent them. The key characteristics of these graphs are the fact that the state set encodes everything that is signi?cant about the computation and the fact that there are ?nitely many of those states. For that reason, the corresponding automata are known as Finite State Automata (FSAs). These come in two main varieties, Deterministic Finite State Automata (DFAs) and Non-Deterministic Finite State Automata (NFAs). We will focus initially on the deterministic variety. When we are talking about ?nite state automata in general, without regard to whether they are deterministic or not, we will use the term FSA.

Posted Date: 3/21/2013 3:27:43 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Finite state automata, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Finite state automata, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Finite state automata Discussions

Write discussion on Finite state automata
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
The Universality Problem is the dual of the emptiness problem: is L(A) = Σ∗? It can be solved by minor variations of any one of the algorithms for Emptiness or (with a little le

a) Let n be the pumping lemma constant. Then if L is regular, PL implies that s can be decomposed into xyz, |y| > 0, |xy| ≤n, such that xy i z is in L for all i ≥0. Since the le

can you plz help with some project ideas relatede to DFA or NFA or anything

A Turing machine is a theoretical computing machine made-up by Alan Turing (1937) to serve as an idealized model for mathematical calculation. A Turing machine having of a line of


Since the signi?cance of the states represented by the nodes of these transition graphs is arbitrary, we will allow ourselves to use any ?nite set (such as {A,B,C,D,E, F,G,H} or ev

One of the first issues to resolve, when exploring any mechanism for defining languages is the question of how to go about constructing instances of the mechanism which define part

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

Can you say that B is decidable? If you somehow know that A is decidable, what can you say about B?

Application of the general suffix substitution closure theorem is slightly more complicated than application of the specific k-local versions. In the specific versions, all we had