简体   繁体   English

语言 {⟨A⟩∣A 是 NFA 并且 L(A)={0,1}∗} 是可判定的吗? 可决定的?

[英]Is the language {⟨A⟩∣A is an NFA and L(A)={0,1}∗} decidable? decidable?

How would one go about proving/disproving the language {⟨A⟩∣A is an NFA and L(A)={0,1}∗} is/isn't decidable?如何证明/反驳语言 {⟨A⟩∣A 是 NFA 并且 L(A)={0,1}∗} 是/不可判定的?

I assumed at first since it was an NFA involved it would be decidable, but since there is no input string to simulate does this change things?我一开始认为因为它涉及 NFA,所以它是可判定的,但是由于没有输入字符串来模拟,这会改变事情吗? If so, how?如果是这样,如何? I can't think of a turing machine that would decide this.我想不出能决定这个的图灵机。 Since {0, 1}* is theoretically infinite does mean a turing machine may never halt thus the language is undecidable?由于 {0, 1}* 理论上是无限的,这是否意味着图灵机可能永远不会停止,因此语言是不可判定的? If so how do I go about proving this?如果是这样,我该如何证明这一点?

Speaking informally, you can show this by constructing a Turing Machine constructs a DFA D_A equivalent to NFA A. It then constructs the DFA D_0 that accepts the language {0,1}*, we can then simulate the decider for EQ_DFA on .非正式地说,您可以通过构造图灵机来证明这一点,它构造了一个等效于 NFA A 的 DFA D_A。然后构造接受语言 {0,1}* 的 DFA D_0,然后我们可以模拟 EQ_DFA 上的决策器。

Formally speaking, construct TM S: S = "On input :正式地说,构造 TM S: S = "On input :

  1. Construct DFA D_A equivalent to A构造等效于 A 的 DFA D_A
  2. Construct DFA D_0 that accepts {0,1}*构造接受 {0,1}* 的 DFA D_0
  3. Simulate decider F for EQ_DFA on where EQ_{DFA} = { |在 EQ_{DFA} = { | 处为 EQ_DFA 模拟决策器 F A and B are DFAs and L(A)=L(B)} (we know that EQ_{DFA} is a decidable language). A 和 B 是 DFA 并且 L(A)=L(B)}(我们知道 EQ_{DFA} 是一种可判定语言)。
  4. Accept if F accepts;如果 F 接受,则接受; reject if F rejects."如果 F 拒绝,则拒绝。”

Less formally:不那么正式:

  1. we can algorithmically determine check that the input represents an NFA according to our format我们可以根据我们的格式通过算法确定检查输入是否代表 NFA
  2. we can algorithmically construct a DFA equivalent to the NFA using the subset construction我们可以使用子集构造在算法上构造一个与 NFA 等效的 DFA
  3. we can algorithmically minimize the DFA using any of several known algorithms我们可以使用几种已知算法中的任何一种在算法上最小化 DFA
  4. we can algorithmically compare the resulting DFA to the one-state DFA for {0, 1}*我们可以通过算法将结果 DFA 与 {0, 1}* 的单状态 DFA 进行比较
  5. if equal, output yes;如果相等,输出是; otherwise, output no.否则,输出编号。

Because we can describe an algorithm to do this, and because we don't suppose we have more computational power than Turing machines (at least the above computations do not require such), the problem must be decidable.因为我们可以描述一个算法来做到这一点,并且因为我们不认为我们比图灵机拥有更多的计算能力(至少上面的计算不需要这样),所以问题必须是可判定的。

暂无
暂无

声明:本站的技术帖子网页,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要转载,请注明本站网址或者原文地址。任何问题请咨询:yoyou2525@163.com.

相关问题 无法创建可判定语言的算法 - Cannot create algorithm for decidable language 常规,可确定的图灵和可识别的图灵是什么意思? - what does regular, Turing-decidable and Turing-recognisable mean? 寻找非确定性有限自动机(NFA)接受给定NFA接受的语言的补充的方法是什么? - What are the ways to find a Non-Deterministic Finite Automata (NFA) that accepts complementary of the language accepted by a given NFA? 是否有一种有效的算法来决定一个NFA接受的语言是否是另一个NFA接受的语言的超集? - Is there an efficient algorithm to decide whether the language accepted by one NFA is a superset of the language accepted by another? 为定义在 Σ = {0, 1} 上的以下语言构建 NFA。 D = {0^n 10^m10^q |n, m, q ∈ N, q ≡ nm (mod 5)} - Construct a NFA for the following language defined over Σ = {0, 1}. D = {0^n 10^m10^q |n, m, q ∈ N, q ≡ nm (mod 5)} L = {a^na^nb^m |m, n ≥ 0} 是规则语言还是不规则语言? - Is L = {a^n a^n b^m |m, n ≥ 0} a regular or irregular language? 无确定化的 NFA 最小化 - NFA minimization without determinization NFA到DFA的问题 - NFA to DFA question pda 接受语言 L={a^nb^m | n <m}< div><div id="text_translate"><p> 我知道如何解决 m&lt;n,但我很难理解 m&gt;n 的逻辑。</p><p> 在 m&lt;n 中,我们将所有 a 压入堆栈,当我们得到 b 时,我们弹出一个 a,当输入以包含 mn a 的堆栈结束时,机器应该进入最终的 state</p><p> 我该怎么办 m&gt;n.... </p></div></m}<> - pda to accept the language L={a^n b^m | n<m} Java中的NFA仿真 - NFA simulation in Java
 
粤ICP备18138465号  © 2020-2024 STACKOOM.COM