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
prove following function is turing computable? f(m)={m-2,if m>2, {1,if

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

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 complica

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

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. N

The fact that regular languages are closed under Boolean operations simpli?es the process of establishing regularity of languages; in essence we can augment the regular operations

implementation of operator precedence grammer

Both L 1 and L 2 are SL 2 . (You should verify this by thinking about what the automata look like.) We claim that L 1 ∪ L 2 ∈ SL 2 . To see this, suppose, by way of con

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

design an automata for strings having exactly four 1''s