Myhill-nerode theorem, Theory of Computation

Assignment Help:

This close relationship between the SL2 languages and the recognizable languages lets us use some of what we know about SL2 to discover properties of the recognizable languages. Because they are SL2 languages, the runs of an automaton A (and, equivalently, the strings of pairs licensed by G2A) will satisfy the 2-suffix substitution closure property. This means that every recognizable language L is a homomorphic image of some language L′ (over an alphabet Σ′ , say) for which

                                                             u′1σ′v′1 ∈ L′ and u′2 σ′v′2 ∈ L′⇒ u′1σ′v′2( and u′2σ′v′1) ∈ L′.

Moreover, u′1σ′v′1 ∈ L′ and u′1σ′v′2 ∈ L′⇒ u′2σ′v′2 ∈ L′

The hypothetical u′1σ′ and u′2σ′ are indistinguishable by the language. Any continuation that extends one to a string in L′ will also extend the other to a string in L′ ; any continuation that extends one to a string not in L′ will extend the other to a string not in L′.

For the SL2 language L′ the strings that are indistinguishable in this way are marked by their ?nal symbol. Things are not as clear for the recognizable language L because the homomorphism may map many symbols of Σ′ to the same symbol of Σ. So it will not generally be the case that we can easily identify the sets of strings that are indistinguishable in this way. But they will, nevertheless, exist. There will be pairs of strings u1 and u2 - namely the homomorphic images of the pairs u′1σ′ and u′2σ′-for which any continuation v, it will be the case that u1v ∈ L iff u2v ∈ L.

This equivalence between strings (in the sense of being indistinguishable by the language in this way) is the key to characterizing the recognizable languages purely in terms of the strings they contain in a way analogous to the way suffix substitution closure characterizes the SL2.


Related Discussions:- Myhill-nerode theorem

Suffix substitution , Exercise Show, using Suffix Substitution Closure, tha...

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

Kleene closure, So we have that every language that can be constructed from...

So we have that every language that can be constructed from SL languages using Boolean operations and concatenation (that is, every language in LTO) is recognizable but there are r

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

Powerset construction, As de?ned the powerset construction builds a DFA wit...

As de?ned the powerset construction builds a DFA with many states that can never be reached from Q′ 0 . Since they cannot be reached from Q′ 0 there is no path from Q′ 0 to a sta

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.

First model of computation, Computer has a single unbounded precision count...

Computer has a single unbounded precision counter which you can only increment, decrement and test for zero. (You may assume that it is initially zero or you may include an explici

Formal language theory, This was one of the ?rst substantial theorems of Fo...

This was one of the ?rst substantial theorems of Formal Language Theory. It's maybe not too surprising to us, as we have already seen a similar equivalence between LTO and SF. But

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