Already have an account? Get multiple benefits of using own account!
Login in your account..!
Remember me
Don't have an account? Create your account in less than a minutes,
Forgot password? how can I recover my password now!
Enter right registered email to receive password!
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 regular expressions rather than just symbols in Σ∪{ε}. We will explain the algorithm using the example of Figure 1.
We begin by adding a new start state s and ?nal state f to the automaton and by extending it to include an edge between every state in Q∪{s} to every state in Q ∪ {f}, including self edges on states in Q. We then consolidate all the edges from a state i to a state j into a single edge, labeled with a regular expression that denotes the set of strings of length 1 or less leading directly from state i to state j in the original automaton. If there was no path directly from i to j in the original automaton the label is ∅. If there were multiple edges (or edges labeled with multiple symbols) the label is the ‘+' of the symbols on those edges (as in the edge from 2 to 1 in the example). There will be an edge from s labeled ε to the original start state and one labeled ∅ to every other state other than f. Similarly, there will be an edge labeled ε from each state in F in the original automaton to state f and one labeled ∅ from those in Q-F to f. The expression graph for the example automaton is given in the right hand side of the ?gure.
The idea, now, is to systematically eliminate the nodes of the transition graph, one at a time, by adding new edges that are equivalent to the paths through that state and then deleting the state and all its incident edges. In general, suppose we are working on eliminating node k. For each pair of states i and j (where i is neither k nor f and j is neither k nor s) there will be a path from i to j through k that looks like:
Exercise Show, using Suffix Substitution Closure, that L 3 . L 3 ∈ SL 2 . Explain how it can be the case that L 3 . L 3 ∈ SL 2 , while L 3 . L 3 ⊆ L + 3 and L + 3 ∈ SL
A problem is said to be unsolvable if no algorithm can solve it. The problem is said to be undecidable if it is a decision problem and no algorithm can decide it. It should be note
RESEARCH POSTER FOR MEALY MACHINE
De?nition (Instantaneous Description) (for both DFAs and NFAs) An instantaneous description of A = (Q,Σ, δ, q 0 , F) , either a DFA or an NFA, is a pair h q ,w i ∈ Q×Σ*, where
Automaton (NFA) (with ε-transitions) is a 5-tuple: (Q,Σ, δ, q 0 , F i where Q, Σ, q 0 and F are as in a DFA and T ⊆ Q × Q × (Σ ∪ {ε}). We must also modify the de?nitions of th
The generalization of the interpretation of strictly local automata as generators is similar, in some respects, to the generalization of Myhill graphs. Again, the set of possible s
DEGENERATE OF THE INITIAL SOLUTION
Find the Regular Grammar for the following Regular Expression: a(a+b)*(ab*+ba*)b.
Theorem (Myhill-Nerode) A language L ⊆ Σ is recognizable iff ≡L partitions Σ* into ?nitely many Nerode equivalence classes. Proof: For the "only if" direction (that every recogn
(c) Can you say that B is decidable? (d) If you somehow know that A is decidable, what can you say about B?
Get guaranteed satisfaction & time on delivery in every assignment order you paid with us! We ensure premium quality solution document along with free turntin report!
whatsapp: +91-977-207-8620
Phone: +91-977-207-8620
Email: [email protected]
All rights reserved! Copyrights ©2019-2020 ExpertsMind IT Educational Pvt Ltd