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

Finite languages and strictly local languages, Theorem The class of ?nite l...

Theorem The class of ?nite languages is a proper subclass of SL. Note that the class of ?nite languages is closed under union and concatenation but SL is not closed under either. N

Normal forms, how to convert a grammar into GNF

how to convert a grammar into GNF

Transition graphs, We represented SLk automata as Myhill graphs, directed g...

We represented SLk automata as Myhill graphs, directed graphs in which the nodes were labeled with (k-1)-factors of alphabet symbols (along with a node labeled ‘?' and one labeled

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

D c o, Prove xy+yz+ýz=xy+z

Prove xy+yz+ýz=xy+z

What is pumping lemma for regular sets, State & prove pumping lemma for reg...

State & prove pumping lemma for regular set. Show that for the language L={ap |p is a prime} is not regular

CNF, S-->AAA|B A-->aA|B B-->epsilon

S-->AAA|B A-->aA|B B-->epsilon

Strictly 2-local languages, The fundamental idea of strictly local language...

The fundamental idea of strictly local languages is that they are speci?ed solely in terms of the blocks of consecutive symbols that occur in a word. We'll start by considering lan

Finite state automata, Since the signi?cance of the states represented by t...

Since the signi?cance of the states represented by the nodes of these transition graphs is arbitrary, we will allow ourselves to use any ?nite set (such as {A,B,C,D,E, F,G,H} or ev

Convert chomsky normal form into binary form, Suppose G = (N, Σ, P, S) is a...

Suppose G = (N, Σ, P, S) is a reduced grammar (we can certainly reduce G if we haven't already). Our algorithm is as follows: 1. Define maxrhs(G) to be the maximum length of the

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