Operations on strictly local languages, Theory of Computation

The class of Strictly Local Languages (in general) is closed under

• intersection but is not closed under

• union

• complement

• concatenation

• Kleene- and positive closure

Proof: For intersection, we can adapt the construction and proof for the SL2 case again to get closure under intersection for SLk. This is still not quite enough for SL in general, since one of the languages may be in SLi and the other in SLj for some i = j. Here we can use the hierarchy theorem to show that, supposing i < j, the SLi language is also in SLj . Then the adapted construction will establish that their intersection is in SL .

For non-closure under union (and consequently under complement) we can use the same counterexample as we did in the SL2 case:

1844_Operations on Strictly Local Languages.png

To see that this is not in SLk for any k we can use the pair

1771_Operations on Strictly Local Languages1.png

which will yield abk-1 a under k-local suffix substitution closure.

2435_Operations on Strictly Local Languages2.png

For non-closure under concatenation we can use the counterexample

The two languages being concatenated are in SL2, hence in SLk for all k ≥ 2 but their concatenation is not in SLk for any k, as we showed in the example above.

Posted Date: 3/22/2013 2:05:18 AM | Location : United States







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

Write discussion on Operations on strictly local languages
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
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


We'll close our consideration of regular languages by looking at whether (certain) problems about regular languages are algorithmically decidable.


Computation of a DFA or NFA without ε-transitions An ID (q 1 ,w 1 ) computes (qn,wn) in A = (Q,Σ, T, q 0 , F) (in zero or more steps) if there is a sequence of IDs (q 1

Paths leading to regions B, C and E are paths which have not yet seen aa. Those leading to region B and E end in a, with those leading to E having seen ba and those leading to B no

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

Differentiate between DFA and NFA. Convert the following Regular Expression into DFA. (0+1)*(01*+10*)*(0+1)*. Also write a regular grammar for this DFA.

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

We saw earlier that LT is not closed under concatenation. If we think in terms of the LT graphs, recognizing the concatenation of LT languages would seem to require knowing, while