Operations on strictly local languages, Theory of Computation

Assignment Help:

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.


Related Discussions:- Operations on strictly local languages

Non-regular languages, Suppose A = (Q,Σ, T, q 0 , F) is a DFA and that Q = ...

Suppose A = (Q,Σ, T, q 0 , F) is a DFA and that Q = {q 0 , q 1 , . . . , q n-1 } includes n states. Thinking of the automaton in terms of its transition graph, a string x is recogn

Computation of an automaton, The computation of an SL 2 automaton A = ( Σ,...

The computation of an SL 2 automaton A = ( Σ, T) on a string w is the maximal sequence of IDs in which each sequential pair of IDs is related by |- A and which starts with the in

Class of local languages is not closed under union, Both L 1 and L 2 are ...

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

Kleene closure, One might assume that non-closure under concatenation would...

One might assume that non-closure under concatenation would imply non closure under both Kleene- and positive closure, since the concatenation of a language with itself is included

Union, Intuitively, closure of SL 2 under intersection is reasonably easy ...

Intuitively, closure of SL 2 under intersection is reasonably easy to see, particularly if one considers the Myhill graphs of the automata. Any path through both graphs will be a

Operator p, implementation of operator precedence grammer

implementation of operator precedence grammer

Myhill graphs, Another way of representing a strictly 2-local automaton is ...

Another way of representing a strictly 2-local automaton is with a Myhill graph. These are directed graphs in which the vertices are labeled with symbols from the input alphabet of

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