PARALLEL COMMUNICATING FLIP PUSHDOWN AUTOMATA SYSTEMS COMMUNICATING BY STACKS
|
|
- Mark Rose
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN (Print) ISSN (Online) Volume 1 Number 1, May - June (2010), pp IAEME, International Journal of Computer Engineering and Technology (IJCET), ISSN (Print), IJCET I A E M E PARALLEL COMMUNICATING FLIP PUSHDOWN AUTOMATA SYSTEMS COMMUNICATING BY STACKS M.Ramakrishnan Research Scholar Anna University of Technology, Coimbatore Coimbatore S.Balasubramanian Research Scholar Anna University of Technology, Coimbatore Coimbatore ABSTRACT In this paper, we introduced parallel communicating flip pushdown automata communicating by stacks. PCFPA (2) equals the family of recursively enumerable languages Also we have proved that. RPCFPA (3) equals the family of recursively enumerable languages. Key words: Pushdown automata, Flip pushdown automata, finite automata 1. INTRODUCTION A pushdown automaton is one way finite automaton with a separate pushdown store, that is first in first out storage structure, which is manipulating by pushing and popping. Probably, such machines are best known for capturing the family of context free languages, which was independently established by Chomsky (Cole 1971). Pushdown automata have been extended in various ways. The extension of pushdown automata is recently introduced, is called flip pushdown automata (Border et al 1982). A is an ordinary pushdown with the additional ability to flip its pushdown push down during the computation. This allows the machine to push and pop at both ends of the pushdown, therefore, a flip-pushdown is a form of a 34
2 dequeue storage structure and it becomes an equally power to Turing machines. A dequeue automaton com simulate two pushdowns. DEFINITION 1.1: PARALLEL COMMUNICATING FLIP PUSHDOWN AUTOMATA Parallel communicating flip pushdown automata system is of degree n is a construct A = (V, Γ, A 1, A 2,..,A n,k) where V is the input alphabet, Γ is the alphabet of pushdown symbols, for each 1 i n, A i = (Q i, V, Γ, f i, i,q i, Z i, F i ) where Q i is a finite set of states, Γ i is a finite pushdown alphabet, f i is a transition mapping from V {ε } Γ i to finite subsets of Q i Γ * i is called transition function, i is a mapping from Q i to 2 Q i, q i Q i, Z i Γ i, F i Q i be the set of final states and K {K 1, K 2,, K n } Γ is the set of query symbols. The Flip Pushdown automata A 1, A 2,..,A n are components of the system A. If there exists only one component, A i, 1 i n, such that (r, α) f i (q, a, A) with α Γ *, α K > 0, for some r, q Q i, a V { }, A Γ, then the system is said to be centralized and A i is said to be the master of the system. For the sake of simplicity, whenever a system is centralized its master is the first component. A parallel communicating flip pushdown automata system is schematically represented in Figure 1.1. As one can see in Figure 1.1, all stacks are connected with each other, each stack can send its contents to any other stack or receive the contents of any other stack. In the centralized case all stacks send their contents to a distinguished stack. In the case of the non-returning strategy, every stack preserves its contents after sending a copy of it to another component while in the case of the returning strategy the stack returns to its initial contents after communication. 35
3 Figure 1.1 parallel communicating flips pushdown automata system The configuration or instantaneous of a parallel communicating flip pushdown automata system is defined as a 3n-tuple (s 1, x 1, α 1, s 2, x 2, α 2 s n, x n, α n ) Where for 1 i n, s i Q i is the current state of the component A i, x i V* is the remaining part of the input word which has not yet been read by A i, α i Γ * is the contents of the ith stack, the rightmost symbol being the topmost symbol on the pushdown store If a is in V { }, x i V*, α i, β i Γ * and Z i is in Γ, Then ( s i, a x i, α i Z i ) ( p i, x i, α i β i ), if the pair (p i, β i ) is in fi (s i, a x i, α i ), for the ordinary pushdown transitions and ( s i, a x i, α i Z i ) (p i, x i, Z i α R i ), if p i is in s i ), for the flip pushdown transition or a pushdown reversal transitions. Whenever, there is a choice between an ordinary pushdown transition or a pushdown reversal of any i, then the pushdown automaton non-deterministically chooses the next move. We do not i ( 36
4 want the flip pushdown automaton to move the bottom of pushdown symbol when the pushdown is flipped. We define two variants of transition relations on the set of configurations of A in the following way: 1. (s 1, x 1, B 1 α 1,... s 2, x n, B n α n ) ( p 1, y 1, β 1,, p n, y n, β n ) Where B i Γ, α i, β i Γ *, 1 i n, iff one of the following two conditions holds: (i) K {B 1, B 2,, B n } = φ and x i = a i y i, a i V {ε}. {p i, β i ) f i (s i, a i, B i ). β i = β i α i, 1 i n, (ii) for all i, 1 i n such that B i = K ji and B ji ε K i β i = B j α ji α i, for all other r, 1 r n, β r = B r α r, and y t = x t, p t = s t, for all t, 1 t n. 2. (s 1, x 1, B 1 α 1,., s n, x n, B n α n ) r (p 1, y 1, β 1,... pn, yn, β n ) Where B i Γ, α i, β i Γ *, 1 i n, iff one of the following two conditions holds: (i) K {B 1, B 2,, B n } = φ and x i = a i y i, a i V {ε}, {p i, β i ) f i (s i, a i, B i ). β i = β i α i, 1 i n, (ii) for all 1 i n such that B i = K j,, and B ji K, for all other r, 1 r n, β r = B r α r, and y t = x t, p t = s t, for all t, 1 t n. The two transition relations defined above differ when the topmost symbols of some stacks are execute a communication step replacing each query symbol with the requested stack contents of the corresponding component. If the topmost symbol of the queried stack is also a query symbol, then first this query symbol must be replaced with the contents of the corresponding stack. The top of each communicated stack must be a non-query symbol before its contents can be sent to another component. If this condition cannot be fulfilled, (a circular query appeared), then the work of the automation system is blocked. After communication, the stack contents of the sending components remain the same in the case of relation, whereas it becomes the initial pushdown memory symbol 37
5 in the case of relation. A parallel communicating flip pushdown automata system whose computations are based on relation is said to be non-returning; if its computations are based on relation, it is said to be returning. The language accepted by a parallel communicating flip automata system A as above is defined as Rec(A) = {x V* (q 1, x, Z 1,, q n, x, Z n ) * (s 1, ε, α 1,, s n, ε, α 1,, s n, ε, α n ), with exactly n pushdown reversals, for any α i Γ * and any s i F i, 1 i n}, Rec r (A) = {x V* (q 1, x, Z 1,, q n, x, Z n ) * r (s 1, ε, α 1,, s n, ε, α 1,, s n, ε, α n ), with exactly n pushdown reversals, for any α i Γ * and any s i F i, 1 i n}, where * and * r, denote the reflexive and transitive closure of and r respectively. In the following we use the notations rcpcpfa (n) - for returning centralized parallel communicating flip pushdown automata systems of degree n, rpcfpa (n) - for returning parallel communicating flip pushdown automata systems of degree n, rpcfpa (n) - for centralized parallel communicating flip pushdown automata systems of degree n, pcfpa (n) - for parallel communicating flip pushdown automata systems of degree n. If x(n) is a type of automata system, then X(n) is the class of languages accepted by pushdown automata systems of type x(n). For example, RCPCFPA (n) is the class of languages accepted by automata of type rcpcfpa (n) (returning centralized parallel communicating flip pushdown automata systems of degree n). 38
6 The following examples shows to help the better understanding of the notions defined above. EXAMPLE1.1 Let us consider the following rpfcpca (4) given by the transition mappings of its components. f 1 (q 1, ε, Z 1 ) = {(s 1, a)}, f 1 (s 1, ε, Z 1 ) = {(p 1, Z 1 )}, f 1 (p 1, ε, Z 1 ) = {(h 1, Z 1 )}, f 1 (h 1, ε, Z 1 ) = {(r 1, Z 1 ), (t 1, K 3 )}, f 1 (t 1, ε, a) = {(s 1, a)}, f 3 (q 3, ε, Z 3 ) = {(s 3, K 1 )}, f 3 (s 3, ε, a) = {(p 3, K 2 a)}, f 3 (p 3, ε, a) = {(h 3, a)}, f 3 (h 3, ε, a) = {(q 3, a)}, f 3 (h 3, ε, Z 3 ) = {(r 3, Z 3 )}, f 3 (r 3, a, Z 3 ) = {(r 3, Z 3 )}, f 2 (q 2, ε, Z 2 ) = {(s 2, K 1 )}, f 2 (s 2, ε, a) = {(p 2, a)}, f 2 (p 2, ε, Z 2 ) = {(h 2, Z 2 )}, f 2 (p 2, ε, Z 2 ) = {(h 2, Z 2 )}, f 2 (r 2, a, Z 2 ) = {(r 2, Z 2 )}, f f 4 (s 4, ε, Z 4 ) = {(h 4, Z 2 )}, 4(q 4, ε, Z 4 ) = {(s 4, Z 4 )}, f 4 (h 4, ε, Z 4 ) = {(t 4, Z 4 )}, (v 4, K 3 Z 4 )}, f 4 (t 4, ε, Z 4 ) = {(u 4, Z 4 )}, f 4 (v 4, ε, a) = {(s 4, Z 4 )}, f 4 (v 4, ε, a) = {(p 4, a}, f 4 (p 4, a, a = {(p 4, ε)}, f 4 (p 4, ε, Z 4 ) = {(r 4, Z 4 )} 39
7 The final states are F 1 = {r 1 }, F 2 = {r 2 }, F 3 = {r 3 }, F 4 = {r 4 }. EXAMPLE1.2 A more intricate way of computation can be observed in the following cpcfpa (2). f 1 (q 1, X, Z 1 ) = {(q 1, Z 1 )} f 1 (s 1, ε, Z 2 ) = {(p 1, ε)} f 1 (p 1, X, X) = {(p 2, ε)} f 1 (p 2, ε, X) = {(p 2, ε)} f 1 (p 2, ε, Z 2 ) = {(p 1, ε)} f 1 (p 1, ε, Z 1 ) = {(p 1, Z1)} f 2 (q 2, X, Z 2 ) = {(q 2, X, Z 2 )} f 1 (q 1, c, Z 1 ) = {(s 1, K 2 Z 1 )} f 2 (s 2, X, Y) = {(q 2, XY)} f 1 (s 1, ε, X) = {(s 1, K 2 X)} f 2 (q 2, c, X) = {(s 2, X)} f 2 (s 2, ε, X) = {(s 2, ε} f 2 (s 2, ε, Z 2 ) = {(s f, Z 2 )} f 2 (s f, ε, Z 2 ) = {(s f, Z 2 )} f 2 (s f, X, Z 2 ) = {(s f, Z 2 )} where X, Y ε {a, b}, and the sets of final states are F1 = {p f }, F 2 = {s f }. LEMMA RCPCFPA(n) RPCFPA(n) and CPCFPA (n) PCFPA(n) for all n X(1) equals the family of context-free languages and X(n) X(n+1) for X {RCPCFPA, RPCFPA, CPCFPA, PCFPA}, n 1. 2 COMPUTATIONAL POWER We start by showing how non-returning parallel communicating pushdown automata systems can be simulated with returning systems. 40
8 THEOREM 2.1 PCFPA(n) RPCFPA (2n) for all n 2. PROOF Let A = (a,, A 1, A 2,..., A n, K) be a pcpa(n) with A i = (Q i, V,, f i, q i, Z i, F i ), 1 i n. We construct the rpcpa (2n) A = (V, Γ, A 1, A 1, A 2, A 2,, A n, ' ' ' ' Where K = { K 1, K 2, K 3,..., Kn} for all 1 i n, A n, K ), K 1, K 2, K 3,..., Kn}, and with A 1 = (Q i {q q Q i }, V, Γ { K i }, f i, q i, Z i, F i }, (1) f i (q, a, A) = {(r, x) (r, x) f i (q, a, A)} (2) f i (q, ε, Z i ) = {(q, K i )}, where q, r Q i, a V {ε}, A Γ, and with A i = ({ q i }, V, Γ {Z i, K 1 }, f i, q i, Z i { q i }}, (3) f i ( q i, a, Z i } = (4) f i ( q i, ε, A} = {( q i, K 1 )}, {( q i, A)}, where a V {ε}, A Γ As one can easily see, every component of A has a satellite component in A. Each accepting step in A is simulated by two accepting and two communication steps in A in the following way: In the first accepting step A i and A i use the rules (1) and (3), respectively. Now the stacks of all components A i have the same contents as the corresponding ones in A. Moreover, the current states of A i are copies of the current states of the corresponding ones in A. 41
9 THEOREM 2.2 PROOF PCFPA (2) equals the family of recursively enumerable languages. Let A = (Q, V, Γ, f, q, B 1, B 2, F) be a two-stack flip pushdown automaton. We construct the pcfpa(2) A = (V, Γ, A 1, A 2, {K 1, K 2 }) with Γ = Γ {Zi, [q, a, X, Y, α, β] i q, α, β) f(r, a, X, Y), q, r, Q, a V {ε}, X, Y Γ, 1 i 2}, and A i = {Q i, V, Γ, A 1, A 2, {K 1, K 2 }) with Γ = Γ {Zi, [q, a, X, Y, α, β] i (q, α, β) f(r, a, X, Y), q, r, Q, a V {ε}, X, Y Γ, 1 i 2}, and A i = {Q i, V, Γ, f i, q i, Z i, F ), 1 i 2. where Q i = {q ch, q rec, q w, [q, α], [q, β] (q, α, β) f(r, a, X, Y), q, r, Q, a V {ε}, X, Y Γ } { q, X q Q, X Γ } {q 1, q 2 }, and F = {q ch, q rec q F}. and the transition mappings are defined as follows: (1) f 1 (q 1,, Z 1 ) = {(q ch, B 1 Z 1 )}, f 1 (q 2,, Z 2 ) = {(q rec, B 2 Z 2 )}, This is the initial step in which both components change their states and stack contents in order to begin the simulation. (2) f 1 (q ch, a, X) = { q ch, [r, a, X, Y, α, β] 1 ) r, α, β) f(q, a, X, Y),, Y Γ }, f 2 (q rec,, X)= { q, X, K 1 )}, f 1 (q rec, ε, X = { q, X, K 2 }, f 2 (q ch, a, Y = { q ch, [r, a, X, Y, α, β] 2 (r, α, β) f(q, a, X, Y), X }, where a V {ε}, X Γ. 42
10 The first automaton, being in a state q ch, q Q, reading a V {ε} on its input tape and X from its memory, chooses a possible move of the two-stack flip pushdown automaton in the same state, reading the same input symbol and reading X from its first stack. This move is encoded in a flip pushdown memory symbol and stored in the memory of the first component. The other component, being in state q rec, q Q requests the memory contents of the first component without moving its reading head. With the second group of transitions of (2) the same process can be done, but with A 2, choosing a possible transition of A to be simulated. In simulation of A 1 and A 2 take turns in choosing the transitions. (3) f 1 (q ch, ε, [r, α, X, Y, α, β] 1 ) = {(r w, α)}, f 1 (q w, ε, X) = {(q w, X), (q rec, X)}, f 2 (q, Y ), α, [r, α, X, Y, α, β] 1 ) = {([r, β], ε)}, f 2 ( q, α], ε, X) = {([q, α], ε)}, f 2 ( q, α], ε, Z 1 ) = {([q ch, α)}, f 2 (q ch, ε, [r, α, X, Y, α, β] 2 ) = {(r w, β)}, f 2 (q w, ε, X) = {(q w, X), (q rec, X)}, f 1 ( q, X, α, [r, α, X, Y, α, β] 2 ) = {([r, β], ε)}, f 1 ( q, α], ε, X) = {([q, α], ε)}, f 1 ( q, α], ε, Z 2 ) = {(q ch, α)} Where q Q and α V {ε}. as the non-returning variants. THEOREM 2.3 PROOF RPCFPA (3) equals the family of recursively enumerable languages. We first show that for every two-stack flip pushdown automaton. Construct an rpcfpa system with three components such that the two devices accept the same language. Let A = (Q, V, Γ, f, qo, Z Z F) be a two-stack flip pushdown automaton , 0, 43
11 Let us associate to any transition (r, α, β) f(q, a, A, B), where q, r Q, a V { }, A, B Γ, α, β, Γ * a new symbol [q, a, A, B, r, α, β] and let us denote the set of these symbols by t. Moreover, let Q = {q q Q} and Q c = { q, x, X q Q, x V {ε}, X Γ }. The simulating rpcfpa A is constructed as follows: A = (V, Γ, A, A 1, A 2, A 3, {K 1 }), Where A = {Z 1, Z 2, Z 3,} Γ Γ t, and A 1 = (Q Q, V, Γ A, f 1, q 0, Z 1, F) A 2 = (Q Q c, V, Γ A, f 2, q 0, A 3 = (Q Q c, V, Γ A, f 3, q 0, 1 Z 0, F) 2 Z 0, F). We define the transition mappings of the components as follows: (1) f 1 (q, a, Z 1 ) = {(r, [q, a, A, B, r, α, β]) [q, a, A, B, r, α, β] Γ t }, f 2 (q, a, A) = {( q, a, A, K 1 )}, f 3 (q, a, B) = {( q, a, B, K 1 )}, where q Q, a V {ε}, A, B Γ, (2) f 1 (r, ε, Z 1 )= (r, Z 1 ), f 2 ( q, a, A), ε, [q, a, A, B, r, α, β]) = f 3 ( q, a, B), ε, [q, a, A, B, r, α, β]) = where r Q, [q, a, A, B, r, α, β] Γ t. 3. CONCLUSION (r, α), (r, β), We define a property called communication parallel communicating flip pushdown automata. Flip pushdown automata are pushdown with the additional ability to flip or reverse its pushdown. We have proved that RPCFPA equals the family of recursively enumerable languages. 44
12 REFERERENCES: 1. Martin-Vide, C., Mateescu, A. and Mitrana, V. (2002), Parallel finite automata Systems communicating by states, International Journal of the Foundations of Computing Science 13 (5),pp A.O.Budo, Multiprocessor automata,infor.process.lett.25(1977) Elena Czeizler and Eugen Czeizler (2006), Parallel Communicating Watson- Crick Automat Systems, Acta Cybernetica 17, Csuhaj Varju, E. and Dassow, J. (1990), On cooperating / distributed grammar systerms, Journal of Information processing and Cybernetics 26, Markus Holzer(2003), Flip pushdown automata: Nondeterminism is better than Determinism, FIG Research Report. 45
Pushdown Automata. Chapter 12
Pushdown Automata Chapter 12 Recognizing Context-Free Languages We need a device similar to an FSM except that it needs more power. The insight: Precisely what it needs is a stack, which gives it an unlimited
More informationAutomata Theory (2A) Young Won Lim 5/31/18
Automata Theory (2A) Copyright (c) 2018 Young W. Lim. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later
More informationP Finite Automata and Regular Languages over Countably Infinite Alphabets
P Finite Automata and Regular Languages over Countably Infinite Alphabets Jürgen Dassow 1 and György Vaszil 2 1 Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg Fakultät für Informatik PSF 4120, D-39016 Magdeburg,
More informationBlackhole Pushdown Automata
Fundamenta Informaticae XXI (2001) 1001 1020 1001 IOS Press Blackhole Pushdown Automata Erzsébet Csuhaj-Varjú Computer and Automation Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences Kende u. 13 17, 1111
More informationHow to Pop a Deep PDA Matters
How to Pop a Deep PDA Matters Peter Leupold Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science Kyoto Sangyo University Kyoto 603-8555, Japan email:leupold@cc.kyoto-su.ac.jp Abstract Deep PDA are push-down automata
More informationSCHEME FOR INTERNAL ASSESSMENT TEST 3
SCHEME FOR INTERNAL ASSESSMENT TEST 3 Max Marks: 40 Subject& Code: Automata Theory & Computability (15CS54) Sem: V ISE (A & B) Note: Answer any FIVE full questions, choosing one full question from each
More informationPart I: Definitions and Properties
Turing Machines Part I: Definitions and Properties Finite State Automata Deterministic Automata (DFSA) M = {Q, Σ, δ, q 0, F} -- Σ = Symbols -- Q = States -- q 0 = Initial State -- F = Accepting States
More informationIntroduction to Formal Languages, Automata and Computability p.1/42
Introduction to Formal Languages, Automata and Computability Pushdown Automata K. Krithivasan and R. Rama Introduction to Formal Languages, Automata and Computability p.1/42 Introduction We have considered
More informationX-machines - a computational model framework.
Chapter 2. X-machines - a computational model framework. This chapter has three aims: To examine the main existing computational models and assess their computational power. To present the X-machines as
More informationLecture 17: Language Recognition
Lecture 17: Language Recognition Finite State Automata Deterministic and Non-Deterministic Finite Automata Regular Expressions Push-Down Automata Turing Machines Modeling Computation When attempting to
More informationTheory of Computation Turing Machine and Pushdown Automata
Theory of Computation Turing Machine and Pushdown Automata 1. What is a Turing Machine? A Turing Machine is an accepting device which accepts the languages (recursively enumerable set) generated by type
More informationFORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA AND COMPUTABILITY
15-453 FORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA AND COMPUTABILITY REVIEW for MIDTERM 1 THURSDAY Feb 6 Midterm 1 will cover everything we have seen so far The PROBLEMS will be from Sipser, Chapters 1, 2, 3 It will be
More informationCPS 220 Theory of Computation Pushdown Automata (PDA)
CPS 220 Theory of Computation Pushdown Automata (PDA) Nondeterministic Finite Automaton with some extra memory Memory is called the stack, accessed in a very restricted way: in a First-In First-Out fashion
More informationTHEORY OF COMPUTATION (AUBER) EXAM CRIB SHEET
THEORY OF COMPUTATION (AUBER) EXAM CRIB SHEET Regular Languages and FA A language is a set of strings over a finite alphabet Σ. All languages are finite or countably infinite. The set of all languages
More informationSYLLABUS. Introduction to Finite Automata, Central Concepts of Automata Theory. CHAPTER - 3 : REGULAR EXPRESSIONS AND LANGUAGES
Contents i SYLLABUS UNIT - I CHAPTER - 1 : AUT UTOMA OMATA Introduction to Finite Automata, Central Concepts of Automata Theory. CHAPTER - 2 : FINITE AUT UTOMA OMATA An Informal Picture of Finite Automata,
More informationC6.2 Push-Down Automata
Theory of Computer Science April 5, 2017 C6. Context-free Languages: Push-down Automata Theory of Computer Science C6. Context-free Languages: Push-down Automata Malte Helmert University of Basel April
More informationDM17. Beregnelighed. Jacob Aae Mikkelsen
DM17 Beregnelighed Jacob Aae Mikkelsen January 12, 2007 CONTENTS Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Operations with languages...................... 2 2 Finite Automata 3 2.1 Regular expressions/languages....................
More information5 3 Watson-Crick Automata with Several Runs
5 3 Watson-Crick Automata with Several Runs Peter Leupold Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science Kyoto Sangyo University, Japan Joint work with Benedek Nagy (Debrecen) Presentation at NCMA 2009
More informationContext-Free Languages
CS:4330 Theory of Computation Spring 2018 Context-Free Languages Pushdown Automata Haniel Barbosa Readings for this lecture Chapter 2 of [Sipser 1996], 3rd edition. Section 2.2. Finite automaton 1 / 13
More informationUndecidable Problems and Reducibility
University of Georgia Fall 2014 Reducibility We show a problem decidable/undecidable by reducing it to another problem. One type of reduction: mapping reduction. Definition Let A, B be languages over Σ.
More informationDistributed-Automata and Simple Test Tube Systems. Prahladh Harsha
Distributed-Automata and Simple Test Tube Systems A Project Report Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Bachelor of Technology in Computer Science and Engineering by Prahladh
More informationP Colonies with a Bounded Number of Cells and Programs
P Colonies with a Bounded Number of Cells and Programs Erzsébet Csuhaj-Varjú 1 Maurice Margenstern 2 György Vaszil 1 1 Computer and Automation Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences Kende utca
More informationChapter 7 Turing Machines
Chapter 7 Turing Machines Copyright 2011 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display. 1 A General Model of Computation Both finite automata and pushdown automata are
More informationAC68 FINITE AUTOMATA & FORMULA LANGUAGES DEC 2013
Q.2 a. Prove by mathematical induction n 4 4n 2 is divisible by 3 for n 0. Basic step: For n = 0, n 3 n = 0 which is divisible by 3. Induction hypothesis: Let p(n) = n 3 n is divisible by 3. Induction
More informationComputability and Complexity
Computability and Complexity Lecture 5 Reductions Undecidable problems from language theory Linear bounded automata given by Jiri Srba Lecture 5 Computability and Complexity 1/14 Reduction Informal Definition
More informationCS21 Decidability and Tractability
CS21 Decidability and Tractability Lecture 8 January 24, 2018 Outline Turing Machines and variants multitape TMs nondeterministic TMs Church-Turing Thesis So far several models of computation finite automata
More informationTheory of Computation
Theory of Computation COMP363/COMP6363 Prerequisites: COMP4 and COMP 6 (Foundations of Computing) Textbook: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation John E. Hopcroft, Rajeev Motwani,
More informationUNIT-VIII COMPUTABILITY THEORY
CONTEXT SENSITIVE LANGUAGE UNIT-VIII COMPUTABILITY THEORY A Context Sensitive Grammar is a 4-tuple, G = (N, Σ P, S) where: N Set of non terminal symbols Σ Set of terminal symbols S Start symbol of the
More informationThe Church-Turing Thesis
The Church-Turing Thesis Huan Long Shanghai Jiao Tong University Acknowledgements Part of the slides comes from a similar course in Fudan University given by Prof. Yijia Chen. http://basics.sjtu.edu.cn/
More informationTuring Machines A Turing Machine is a 7-tuple, (Q, Σ, Γ, δ, q0, qaccept, qreject), where Q, Σ, Γ are all finite
The Church-Turing Thesis CS60001: Foundations of Computing Science Professor, Dept. of Computer Sc. & Engg., Turing Machines A Turing Machine is a 7-tuple, (Q, Σ, Γ, δ, q 0, q accept, q reject ), where
More informationCISC4090: Theory of Computation
CISC4090: Theory of Computation Chapter 2 Context-Free Languages Courtesy of Prof. Arthur G. Werschulz Fordham University Department of Computer and Information Sciences Spring, 2014 Overview In Chapter
More informationFoundations of Informatics: a Bridging Course
Foundations of Informatics: a Bridging Course Week 3: Formal Languages and Semantics Thomas Noll Lehrstuhl für Informatik 2 RWTH Aachen University noll@cs.rwth-aachen.de http://www.b-it-center.de/wob/en/view/class211_id948.html
More informationEquivalence of TMs and Multitape TMs. Theorem 3.13 and Corollary 3.15 By: Joseph Lauman
Equivalence of TMs and Multitape TMs Theorem 3.13 and Corollary 3.15 By: Joseph Lauman Turing Machines First proposed by Alan Turing in 1936 Similar to finite automaton, but with an unlimited and unrestricted
More informationPushdown Automata. We have seen examples of context-free languages that are not regular, and hence can not be recognized by finite automata.
Pushdown Automata We have seen examples of context-free languages that are not regular, and hence can not be recognized by finite automata. Next we consider a more powerful computation model, called a
More informationIntroduction to Languages and Computation
Introduction to Languages and Computation George Voutsadakis 1 1 Mathematics and Computer Science Lake Superior State University LSSU Math 400 George Voutsadakis (LSSU) Languages and Computation July 2014
More informationEinführung in die Computerlinguistik
Einführung in die Computerlinguistik Context-Free Grammars (CFG) Laura Kallmeyer Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf Summer 2016 1 / 22 CFG (1) Example: Grammar G telescope : Productions: S NP VP NP
More informationFORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA AND COMPUTABILITY
15-453 FORMAL LANGUAGES, AUTOMATA AND COMPUTABILITY Chomsky Normal Form and TURING MACHINES TUESDAY Feb 4 CHOMSKY NORMAL FORM A context-free grammar is in Chomsky normal form if every rule is of the form:
More informationIntroduction to Turing Machines. Reading: Chapters 8 & 9
Introduction to Turing Machines Reading: Chapters 8 & 9 1 Turing Machines (TM) Generalize the class of CFLs: Recursively Enumerable Languages Recursive Languages Context-Free Languages Regular Languages
More informationFinal exam study sheet for CS3719 Turing machines and decidability.
Final exam study sheet for CS3719 Turing machines and decidability. A Turing machine is a finite automaton with an infinite memory (tape). Formally, a Turing machine is a 6-tuple M = (Q, Σ, Γ, δ, q 0,
More informationTuring Machines. 22c:135 Theory of Computation. Tape of a Turing Machine (TM) TM versus FA, PDA
Turing Machines A Turing machine is similar to a finite automaton with supply of unlimited memory. A Turing machine can do everything that any computing device can do. There exist problems that even a
More informationP Colonies with a Bounded Number of Cells and Programs
P Colonies with a Bounded Number of Cells and Programs Erzsébet Csuhaj-Varjú 1,2, Maurice Margenstern 3, and György Vaszil 1 1 Computer and Automation Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences
More informationEquivalent Variations of Turing Machines
Equivalent Variations of Turing Machines Nondeterministic TM = deterministic TM npda = pushdown automata with n stacks 2PDA = npda = TM for all n 2 Turing machines with n tapes (n 2) and n tape heads has
More informationIntroduction: Computer Science is a cluster of related scientific and engineering disciplines concerned with the study and application of computations. These disciplines range from the pure and basic scientific
More informationThe Pumping Lemma. for all n 0, u 1 v n u 2 L (i.e. u 1 u 2 L, u 1 vu 2 L [but we knew that anyway], u 1 vvu 2 L, u 1 vvvu 2 L, etc.
The Pumping Lemma For every regular language L, there is a number l 1 satisfying the pumping lemma property: All w L with w l can be expressed as a concatenation of three strings, w = u 1 vu 2, where u
More informationMA/CSSE 474 Theory of Computation
MA/CSSE 474 Theory of Computation CFL Hierarchy CFL Decision Problems Your Questions? Previous class days' material Reading Assignments HW 12 or 13 problems Anything else I have included some slides online
More informationLet us first give some intuitive idea about a state of a system and state transitions before describing finite automata.
Finite Automata Automata (singular: automation) are a particularly simple, but useful, model of computation. They were initially proposed as a simple model for the behavior of neurons. The concept of a
More informationHomework 8. a b b a b a b. two-way, read/write
Homework 8 309 Homework 8 1. Describe a TM that accepts the set {a n n is a power of 2}. Your description should be at the level of the descriptions in Lecture 29 of the TM that accepts {ww w Σ } and the
More informationPushdown Automata: Introduction (2)
Pushdown Automata: Introduction Pushdown automaton (PDA) M = (K, Σ, Γ,, s, A) where K is a set of states Σ is an input alphabet Γ is a set of stack symbols s K is the start state A K is a set of accepting
More informationCOMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON TURING MACHINE AND QUANTUM TURING MACHINE
Volume 3, No. 5, May 2012 Journal of Global Research in Computer Science REVIEW ARTICLE Available Online at www.jgrcs.info COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON TURING MACHINE AND QUANTUM TURING MACHINE Tirtharaj Dash
More informationPushdown Automata. Reading: Chapter 6
Pushdown Automata Reading: Chapter 6 1 Pushdown Automata (PDA) Informally: A PDA is an NFA-ε with a infinite stack. Transitions are modified to accommodate stack operations. Questions: What is a stack?
More informationCSE 105 THEORY OF COMPUTATION
CSE 105 THEORY OF COMPUTATION Spring 2017 http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/classes/sp17/cse105-ab/ Review of CFG, CFL, ambiguity What is the language generated by the CFG below: G 1 = ({S,T 1,T 2 }, {0,1,2}, { S
More informationTheoretical Computer Science. Complexity of multi-head finite automata: Origins and directions
Theoretical Computer Science 412 (2011) 83 96 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Theoretical Computer Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tcs Complexity of multi-head finite automata:
More informationTuring machines Finite automaton no storage Pushdown automaton storage is a stack What if we give the automaton a more flexible storage?
Turing machines Finite automaton no storage Pushdown automaton storage is a stack What if we give the automaton a more flexible storage? What is the most powerful of automata? In this lecture we will introduce
More informationTuring s thesis: (1930) Any computation carried out by mechanical means can be performed by a Turing Machine
Turing s thesis: (1930) Any computation carried out by mechanical means can be performed by a Turing Machine There is no known model of computation more powerful than Turing Machines Definition of Algorithm:
More informationCS 154, Lecture 2: Finite Automata, Closure Properties Nondeterminism,
CS 54, Lecture 2: Finite Automata, Closure Properties Nondeterminism, Why so Many Models? Streaming Algorithms 0 42 Deterministic Finite Automata Anatomy of Deterministic Finite Automata transition: for
More informationFinite Automata Theory and Formal Languages TMV027/DIT321 LP4 2018
Finite Automata Theory and Formal Languages TMV027/DIT321 LP4 2018 Lecture 15 Ana Bove May 17th 2018 Recap: Context-free Languages Chomsky hierarchy: Regular languages are also context-free; Pumping lemma
More informationRecap DFA,NFA, DTM. Slides by Prof. Debasis Mitra, FIT.
Recap DFA,NFA, DTM Slides by Prof. Debasis Mitra, FIT. 1 Formal Language Finite set of alphabets Σ: e.g., {0, 1}, {a, b, c}, { {, } } Language L is a subset of strings on Σ, e.g., {00, 110, 01} a finite
More informationAddress: Electronics and Communication Sciences Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata-108.
Running head: Multi-head Watson-Crick automata Title: Multi-head Watson-Crick automata Authors: Kingshuk Chatterjee 1, Kumar Sankar Ray(corresponding author) Affiliations: 1 Electronics and Communication
More informationChapter 1. Formal Definition and View. Lecture Formal Pushdown Automata on the 28th April 2009
Chapter 1 Formal and View Lecture on the 28th April 2009 Formal of PA Faculty of Information Technology Brno University of Technology 1.1 Aim of the Lecture 1 Define pushdown automaton in a formal way
More informationTWO-WAY FINITE AUTOMATA & PEBBLE AUTOMATA. Written by Liat Peterfreund
TWO-WAY FINITE AUTOMATA & PEBBLE AUTOMATA Written by Liat Peterfreund 1 TWO-WAY FINITE AUTOMATA A two way deterministic finite automata (2DFA) is a quintuple M Q,,, q0, F where: Q,, q, F are as before
More informationHarvard CS 121 and CSCI E-207 Lecture 10: Ambiguity, Pushdown Automata
Harvard CS 121 and CSCI E-207 Lecture 10: Ambiguity, Pushdown Automata Salil Vadhan October 4, 2012 Reading: Sipser, 2.2. Another example of a CFG (with proof) L = {x {a, b} : x has the same # of a s and
More informationCSE 105 THEORY OF COMPUTATION
CSE 105 THEORY OF COMPUTATION Spring 2016 http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/classes/sp16/cse105-ab/ Today's learning goals Sipser Ch 3.3, 4.1 State and use the Church-Turing thesis. Give examples of decidable problems.
More informationChomsky Normal Form and TURING MACHINES. TUESDAY Feb 4
Chomsky Normal Form and TURING MACHINES TUESDAY Feb 4 CHOMSKY NORMAL FORM A context-free grammar is in Chomsky normal form if every rule is of the form: A BC A a S ε B and C aren t start variables a is
More informationIntroduction to the Theory of Computation. Automata 1VO + 1PS. Lecturer: Dr. Ana Sokolova.
Introduction to the Theory of Computation Automata 1VO + 1PS Lecturer: Dr. Ana Sokolova http://cs.uni-salzburg.at/~anas/ Setup and Dates Lectures and Instructions 23.10. 3.11. 17.11. 24.11. 1.12. 11.12.
More informationPushdown Automata. Pushdown Automata. Pushdown Automata. Pushdown Automata. Pushdown Automata. Pushdown Automata. The stack
A pushdown automata (PDA) is essentially: An NFA with a stack A move of a PDA will depend upon Current state of the machine Current symbol being read in Current symbol popped off the top of the stack With
More informationPushdown Automata (2015/11/23)
Chapter 6 Pushdown Automata (2015/11/23) Sagrada Familia, Barcelona, Spain Outline 6.0 Introduction 6.1 Definition of PDA 6.2 The Language of a PDA 6.3 Euivalence of PDA s and CFG s 6.4 Deterministic PDA
More information5 Context-Free Languages
CA320: COMPUTABILITY AND COMPLEXITY 1 5 Context-Free Languages 5.1 Context-Free Grammars Context-Free Grammars Context-free languages are specified with a context-free grammar (CFG). Formally, a CFG G
More information6.045J/18.400J: Automata, Computability and Complexity. Quiz 2. March 30, Please write your name in the upper corner of each page.
6.045J/18.400J: Automata, Computability and Complexity March 30, 2005 Quiz 2 Prof. Nancy Lynch Please write your name in the upper corner of each page. Problem Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total Q2-1 Problem 1: True
More information(b) If G=({S}, {a}, {S SS}, S) find the language generated by G. [8+8] 2. Convert the following grammar to Greibach Normal Form G = ({A1, A2, A3},
Code No: 07A50501 R07 Set No. 2 III B.Tech I Semester Examinations,MAY 2011 FORMAL LANGUAGES AND AUTOMATA THEORY Computer Science And Engineering Time: 3 hours Max Marks: 80 Answer any FIVE Questions All
More informationCOM364 Automata Theory Lecture Note 2 - Nondeterminism
COM364 Automata Theory Lecture Note 2 - Nondeterminism Kurtuluş Küllü March 2018 The FA we saw until now were deterministic FA (DFA) in the sense that for each state and input symbol there was exactly
More informationAnnouncements. Problem Set 6 due next Monday, February 25, at 12:50PM. Midterm graded, will be returned at end of lecture.
Turing Machines Hello Hello Condensed Slide Slide Readers! Readers! This This lecture lecture is is almost almost entirely entirely animations that that show show how how each each Turing Turing machine
More informationCS 455/555: Finite automata
CS 455/555: Finite automata Stefan D. Bruda Winter 2019 AUTOMATA (FINITE OR NOT) Generally any automaton Has a finite-state control Scans the input one symbol at a time Takes an action based on the currently
More informationIntroduction to the Theory of Computation. Automata 1VO + 1PS. Lecturer: Dr. Ana Sokolova.
Introduction to the Theory of Computation Automata 1VO + 1PS Lecturer: Dr. Ana Sokolova http://cs.uni-salzburg.at/~anas/ Setup and Dates Lectures Tuesday 10:45 pm - 12:15 pm Instructions Tuesday 12:30
More informationThe Power of One-State Turing Machines
The Power of One-State Turing Machines Marzio De Biasi Jan 15, 2018 Abstract At first glance, one state Turing machines are very weak: the Halting problem for them is decidable, and, without memory, they
More information1. Draw a parse tree for the following derivation: S C A C C A b b b b A b b b b B b b b b a A a a b b b b a b a a b b 2. Show on your parse tree u,
1. Draw a parse tree for the following derivation: S C A C C A b b b b A b b b b B b b b b a A a a b b b b a b a a b b 2. Show on your parse tree u, v, x, y, z as per the pumping theorem. 3. Prove that
More informationFoundations of
91.304 Foundations of (Theoretical) Computer Science Chapter 3 Lecture Notes (Section 3.2: Variants of Turing Machines) David Martin dm@cs.uml.edu With some modifications by Prof. Karen Daniels, Fall 2012
More informationcse303 ELEMENTS OF THE THEORY OF COMPUTATION Professor Anita Wasilewska
cse303 ELEMENTS OF THE THEORY OF COMPUTATION Professor Anita Wasilewska LECTURE 13 CHAPTER 4 TURING MACHINES 1. The definition of Turing machine 2. Computing with Turing machines 3. Extensions of Turing
More informationMost General computer?
Turing Machines Most General computer? DFAs are simple model of computation. Accept only the regular languages. Is there a kind of computer that can accept any language, or compute any function? Recall
More informationCSE 105 THEORY OF COMPUTATION
CSE 105 THEORY OF COMPUTATION Spring 2016 http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/classes/sp16/cse105-ab/ Today's learning goals Sipser Ch 2 Define push down automata Trace the computation of a push down automaton Design
More informationA Uniformization Theorem for Nested Word to Word Transductions
A Uniformization Theorem for Nested Word to Word Transductions Dmitry Chistikov and Rupak Majumdar Max Planck Institute for Software Systems (MPI-SWS) Kaiserslautern and Saarbrücken, Germany {dch,rupak}@mpi-sws.org
More informationComputability and Complexity
Computability and Complexity Push-Down Automata CAS 705 Ryszard Janicki Department of Computing and Software McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario, Canada janicki@mcmaster.ca Ryszard Janicki Computability
More informationPushdown Automata. Notes on Automata and Theory of Computation. Chia-Ping Chen
Pushdown Automata Notes on Automata and Theory of Computation Chia-Ping Chen Department of Computer Science and Engineering National Sun Yat-Sen University Kaohsiung, Taiwan ROC Pushdown Automata p. 1
More informationMTH401A Theory of Computation. Lecture 17
MTH401A Theory of Computation Lecture 17 Chomsky Normal Form for CFG s Chomsky Normal Form for CFG s For every context free language, L, the language L {ε} has a grammar in which every production looks
More informationECS 120 Lesson 15 Turing Machines, Pt. 1
ECS 120 Lesson 15 Turing Machines, Pt. 1 Oliver Kreylos Wednesday, May 2nd, 2001 Before we can start investigating the really interesting problems in theoretical computer science, we have to introduce
More informationFormal Languages and Automata
Formal Languages and Automata Lecture 6 2017-18 LFAC (2017-18) Lecture 6 1 / 31 Lecture 6 1 The recognition problem: the Cocke Younger Kasami algorithm 2 Pushdown Automata 3 Pushdown Automata and Context-free
More informationFinite Automata. Mahesh Viswanathan
Finite Automata Mahesh Viswanathan In this lecture, we will consider different models of finite state machines and study their relative power. These notes assume that the reader is familiar with DFAs,
More informationPush-down Automata = FA + Stack
Push-down Automata = FA + Stack PDA Definition A push-down automaton M is a tuple M = (Q,, Γ, δ, q0, F) where Q is a finite set of states is the input alphabet (of terminal symbols, terminals) Γ is the
More informationTuring Machines Part II
Turing Machines Part II COMP2600 Formal Methods for Software Engineering Katya Lebedeva Australian National University Semester 2, 2016 Slides created by Katya Lebedeva COMP 2600 Turing Machines 1 Why
More informationVariants of Turing Machine (intro)
CHAPTER 3 The Church-Turing Thesis Contents Turing Machines definitions, examples, Turing-recognizable and Turing-decidable languages Variants of Turing Machine Multi-tape Turing machines, non-deterministic
More informationKybernetika. Daniel Reidenbach; Markus L. Schmid Automata with modulo counters and nondeterministic counter bounds
Kybernetika Daniel Reidenbach; Markus L. Schmid Automata with modulo counters and nondeterministic counter bounds Kybernetika, Vol. 50 (2014), No. 1, 66 94 Persistent URL: http://dml.cz/dmlcz/143764 Terms
More information3.13. PUSHDOWN AUTOMATA Pushdown Automata
3.13. PUSHDOWN AUTOMATA 317 3.13 Pushdown Automata We have seen that the regular languages are exactly the languages accepted by DFA s or NFA s. The context-free languages are exactly the languages accepted
More informationComputational Models - Lecture 4
Computational Models - Lecture 4 Regular languages: The Myhill-Nerode Theorem Context-free Grammars Chomsky Normal Form Pumping Lemma for context free languages Non context-free languages: Examples Push
More informationTheory of Computation
Thomas Zeugmann Hokkaido University Laboratory for Algorithmics http://www-alg.ist.hokudai.ac.jp/ thomas/toc/ Lecture 10: CF, PDAs and Beyond Greibach Normal Form I We want to show that all context-free
More informationCS5371 Theory of Computation. Lecture 10: Computability Theory I (Turing Machine)
CS537 Theory of Computation Lecture : Computability Theory I (Turing Machine) Objectives Introduce the Turing Machine (TM) Proposed by Alan Turing in 936 finite-state control + infinitely long tape A stronger
More informationIntroduction to Turing Machines
Introduction to Turing Machines Deepak D Souza Department of Computer Science and Automation Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. 12 November 2015 Outline 1 Turing Machines 2 Formal definitions 3 Computability
More informationChapter Five: Nondeterministic Finite Automata
Chapter Five: Nondeterministic Finite Automata From DFA to NFA A DFA has exactly one transition from every state on every symbol in the alphabet. By relaxing this requirement we get a related but more
More informationT (s, xa) = T (T (s, x), a). The language recognized by M, denoted L(M), is the set of strings accepted by M. That is,
Recall A deterministic finite automaton is a five-tuple where S is a finite set of states, M = (S, Σ, T, s 0, F ) Σ is an alphabet the input alphabet, T : S Σ S is the transition function, s 0 S is the
More informationOutline. CS21 Decidability and Tractability. Machine view of FA. Machine view of FA. Machine view of FA. Machine view of FA.
Outline CS21 Decidability and Tractability Lecture 5 January 16, 219 and Languages equivalence of NPDAs and CFGs non context-free languages January 16, 219 CS21 Lecture 5 1 January 16, 219 CS21 Lecture
More informationFinite Automata. Seungjin Choi
Finite Automata Seungjin Choi Department of Computer Science and Engineering Pohang University of Science and Technology 77 Cheongam-ro, Nam-gu, Pohang 37673, Korea seungjin@postech.ac.kr 1 / 28 Outline
More informationDefinition: A grammar G = (V, T, P,S) is a context free grammar (cfg) if all productions in P have the form A x where
Recitation 11 Notes Context Free Grammars Definition: A grammar G = (V, T, P,S) is a context free grammar (cfg) if all productions in P have the form A x A V, and x (V T)*. Examples Problem 1. Given the
More information