Finiteness of languages is decidable, Theory of Computation

To see this, note that if there are any cycles in the Myhill graph of A then L(A) will be infinite, since any such cycle can be repeated arbitrarily many times. Conversely, if the Myhill graph is acyclic, then no path from x to x can be longer than card(Σ) + 2, since otherwise some node would have to occur at least twice in the path.

The question of finiteness of L(A), then, can be reduced to the question of acyclicity of the corresponding Myhill graph. And we established that there is an algorithm for testing acyclicity of graphs in Algorithms and Data Structures. Our algorithm for deciding finiteness of L(A) just interprets A as a graph and calls the algorithm for deciding acyclicity as a subroutine.

Posted Date: 3/21/2013 6:04:45 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Finiteness of languages is decidable, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Finiteness of languages is decidable, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Finiteness of languages is decidable Discussions

Write discussion on Finiteness of languages is decidable
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
The class of Strictly Local Languages (in general) is closed under • intersection but is not closed under • union • complement • concatenation • Kleene- and positive

how to convert a grammar into GNF

Define the following concept with an example: a.    Ambiguity in CFG b.    Push-Down Automata c.    Turing Machine

The Myhill-Nerode Theorem provided us with an algorithm for minimizing DFAs. Moreover, the DFA the algorithm produces is unique up to isomorphism: every minimal DFA that recognizes

Sketch an algorithm for the universal recognition problem for SL 2 . This takes an automaton and a string and returns TRUE if the string is accepted by the automaton, FALSE otherwi

Ask queyystion #Minimum 100 words accepted#

Trees and Graphs Overview: The problems for this assignment should be written up in a Mircosoft Word document. A scanned hand written file for the diagrams is also fine. Be


So we have that every language that can be constructed from SL languages using Boolean operations and concatenation (that is, every language in LTO) is recognizable but there are r

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