Concatenation, Theory of Computation

Assignment Help:

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 scanning a string in L1 . L2, for instance, when to switch from keeping track of factors for L1 to keeping track of factors from L2.

Assuming that the alphabets were not disjoint, there is (evidently, since LT is not closed under concatenation) no way, in general, to know that. For the recognizable languages, on the other hand, we have the convenience of being able to work with non-determinism. We don't actually have to know when to switch from one automaton to the next. Whenever we get to a point in the string that could possibly be the end of the pre?x that is in L1 we can just allow for a non-deterministic choice of whether to continue scanning for A1 (the machine recognizing L1) or to switch to scanning for A2. Since whenever the string is in L1 .  L2 there will be some correct place to switch and since acceptance by a NFA requires only that there some accepting computation, the combined automaton will accept every string in L1 . L2. Moreover, the combined automaton will accept a string iff there is some point at which it can be split into a string accepted by A1 followed by one accepted by A2: it accepts all and only the strings in L1 . L2.


Related Discussions:- Concatenation

Ogdens lemma, proof ogdens lemma .with example i am not able to undestand ...

proof ogdens lemma .with example i am not able to undestand the meaning of distinguished position .

Fsa as generators, The SL 2 languages are speci?ed with a set of 2-factors...

The SL 2 languages are speci?ed with a set of 2-factors in Σ 2 (plus some factors in {?}Σ and some factors in Σ{?} distinguishing symbols that may occur at the beginning and en

Construct a recognizer, Let L1 and L2 be CGF. We show that L1 ∩ L2 is CFG t...

Let L1 and L2 be CGF. We show that L1 ∩ L2 is CFG too. Let M1 be a decider for L1 and M2 be a decider for L2 . Consider a 2-tape TM M: "On input x: 1. copy x on the sec

Decision problems, In Exercise 9 you showed that the recognition problem an...

In Exercise 9 you showed that the recognition problem and universal recognition problem for SL2 are decidable. We can use the structure of Myhill graphs to show that other problems

Pushdown automator, draw pda for l={an,bm,an/m,n>=0} n is in superscript

draw pda for l={an,bm,an/m,n>=0} n is in superscript

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.

Computer Simulation, Generate 100 random numbers with the exponential distr...

Generate 100 random numbers with the exponential distribution lambda=5.0.What is the probability that the largest of them is less than 1.0?

Write Your Message!

Captcha
Free Assignment Quote

Assured A++ Grade

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!

All rights reserved! Copyrights ©2019-2020 ExpertsMind IT Educational Pvt Ltd