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:

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

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

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

Ask an Expert

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

Write your message here..

Related Questions

Nfas with e-transitions, We now add an additional degree of non-determinism... 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

Computer architecture, What are the issues in computer design? What are the issues in computer design?

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

Sdsdsd, dsdsd dsdsd

Computation of a dfa or nfa, Computation of a DFA or NFA without ε-transiti... 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

Finite-state automaton, Paths leading to regions B, C and E are paths which... 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

Universality problem, The Universality Problem is the dual of the emptiness... 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, Differentiate between DFA and NFA. Conve... 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.

Construct a regular expression, Given any NFA A, we will construct a regula... 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

Concatenation, We saw earlier that LT is not closed under concatenation. If... 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