Can any one help to figure out that L = { am bn, m ≥ n + 2, m ≤ 3 } is regular or not using pumping lemma, It seems to be a bit difficult to prove.
I have tried to used pumping lemma and it shows that it is regular language but i am really confused that is this right or not.
I have tried to used pumping lemma and it shows that it is regular language but I am really confused that is this right or not.
First note, the pumping lemma can be used to proof that "certain language is not a regular language". But we can not use pumping lemma to proof that "certain language is a regular".
Yes, the pumping lemma for regular languages describes an essential property of all regular languages, and if a languages don't satisfy the conditions described by pumping lemma or say don't satisfy pumping lemma property then that language is actually not a regular language, But the converse of this is not true!! &mdash- there are "languages those satisfies pumping lemma's conditions and may still be non-regular", means:-
Pumping lemma is 'necessary but not sufficient condition' for a language to be regular.
This is something like: every engineer is math student - so if a student is engineer we can say that he knows math, but their are math students those don't know engineering. (just giving you an example to explain)
From your question, I have impression that you don't understand basically - "what is a regular language?".
Unlike pumping lemma for regular languages, we need to learn some other characteristics of regular languages - finding them in a language proofs that the language is a regular language. If you can represent a language using finite automata or/and regular expression that proofs that the language is a regular language.
Now, come to your original question:
How to proof that language { am bn, m ≥ n + 2, m ≤ 3 } is regular or not?
Because neither 'm' or 'n' can be negative (a string without occurrence of any symbol is possible eg. empty string1, but a string with negative occurrence of language symbols is not possible) and according to condition "m ≥ n + 2", 'm' is always greater than 'n' — so minimum value of 'm' (when 'n' is 0) is 2. From second condition "m ≤ 3", maximum value of 'm' is '3', and so 'm' can be either 2 or 3.
If you again notice fist condition: "m ≥ n + 2" for m = {2, 3} possible values for 'n' can be:
for m = 2, n can be 0 and that makes string 'aa'.
for m = 3, n can be 0 or 1 and that makes strings 'aaa', 'aaab'.
So, it came that the language is a finite language e. only consists of three strings. Every finite language is a regular language, check venn diagram:
(to lean more about this read: Finiteness of Regular Language)
Regular expression for your language L = { am bn, m ≥ n + 2, m ≤ 3 } would be aa(a + Λ)(b + Λ),
hence it is proofed that language is a regular language.
1 a string without occurrence of any symbol is called empty or null string in formal languages, in most of formal language books symbol Ɛ for empty string.
Λ is empty symbol.
we cannot use the pumping lemma for proving language is regular.To prove a language is regular we should design DFA for that language
Related
let L = {wwRu | w, u ∈ {0,1}+}. Is L regular language ? Note that w, u cannot be empty.
I've tried to prove it is not regular language by the pumping lemma, but I failed when w = 0^p1^p, 01^p, (01)^p. Once I take y = 0^p or 1^p, xyyz will be 00.../11.../01^n0... etc.
And I cannot draw its DFA/NFA or write its regular expression to prove it is regular language.
So is L regular or not ? How can I prove it ?
The language is not regular, and we can prove it using the Myhill-Nerode theorem.
Consider the sequence of strings 01, 0101, ..., (01)^n, ...
First, notice that none of these strings are in the language. Any prefix of any of these strings which has even length is of the form (01)^2m for some m, and therefore just a shorter string in the sequence; splitting such a prefix in two either has both substrings start with 0 and end with 1, or else it has the first substring start and end with 0 and the second start and end with 1. In either case, these strings are not of the form w(w^R)u for any w or u.
Next, notice that the shortest possible string which we can append to any of these strings, to produce a string in the language, is always the reverse of itself followed by either 0 or 1. That is, to turn 01 into a string in the language, we must append 100 or 101; there are no shorter strings we can append to 01 to get a string in the language. The same holds true for 0101: 10100 and 10101 are the shortest possible strings that take 0101 to a string in L. And so on for each string of the form (01)^n.
This means that each string of the form (01)^n is distinguishable with respect to the target language w(w^R)u. The Myhill-Nerode theorem tells us that a minimal DFA for a regular language has exactly as many states as there are equivalence classes under the indistinguishability relation. Because we have infinitely many distinguishable strings with respect to our language, a minimal DFA for this language must have infinitely many states. But, a DFA cannot have infinitely many states; this is a contradiction. This means that our language cannot be regular.
The language is REGULAR:
L = 00(0+1)+ + 11(0+1)+ + 0(11)+0(0+1)+ + 1(00)+1(0+1)+
I'm trying to prove that the complement of L= {a^i b^i c^i : i >= 1} is a context free. L complement is: {w is a word over {a,b,c}* : w not in L}.
As we know, context-free languages are closed under union. So, I'm trying to divide my language (complement of {a^i b^i c^i}) into context-free subsets in which their union must be context-free. Could anyone help me to find the subsets? Each time I try to, I end up with L*!
Thank you.
Note: In the following, I left out the constraint that L does not include the empty string, but that only requires a small adjustment.
Consider aibjck.
If i=j and j=k then you have aibici. Conversely, if i≠j or j≠k, then you have the part of the complement of aibici which consists of strings in a*b*c* (the rest of the complement is straight-forward).
In other words,
L = { aibjck | i=j } ∩ { aibjck | j=k }
and
L' = { aibjck | i≠j } ∪ { aibjck | j≠k }
It's easy to show that each subset in the above equations is context-free. As you say, context-free languages are closed under union, but they are not closed under intersection; consequently, L' is context-free even though L is not.
There is a direct way to prove it: If p is the pumping length and we take the string s = 0p1p+p!, then no matter what the decomposition s = xyz is the string xy1+p!/|y|z will equal 0p+p!1p+p! which is not in the language.
I don't understand the value y given here.
y is some substring that can be "pumped" - repeated * times - and still keep the language regular. Basically, we have to find a loop in there somewhere, and that loop is what y represents.
Basically, if the language is of the form 0m1m! (m zeroes followed by m! ones) then there can't be a loop in there.
In this case, y represents "the hypothetical pump string for the subset language {0m1m!}" - hypothetical because it cannot exist! Clearly, no pumping is possible for this smaller language, since repetition will take us out of the language immediately. (consider the example 00111111 - can we find a pump string for this?) Therefore, we have a special case of the language which is not regular, therefore the language generally is not regular. (though it certainly contains special cases which are regular, but this is not in dispute)
Im looking forward to design a FA which accepts some kind of string that accept some A and B.
First a string which the number of A is five more times higher than B.
i mean L={w∈{A,B}* and (nA(W)-nB(W) mod 5=0)
And also a FA which accept different number of character in a string:
L={A^n B^m C^k | n,k>0 and m>3}
I design some FAs But they did not work perfectly on this complicated strings.
Any help on how should i design this ?
Unfortunately, your questions are confusing as the english text doesn't agree with the mathematical formula. I will try to answer to these four questions then:
A language which consists of string over {a,b} that the number of a (= #a(w))
is five times as the number of b ( #b(w)),
L = { w in {a,b}* : #a(w)>#b(w) and #a(w)=#b(w)mod5 }
This cannot be done by an NFA. The proof is simple by using the pumping lemma (P.L) with the string a^pb^5p, where p is the constant of P.L.
For the language: L={w∈{A,B}* : (nA(W)-nB(W)) mod 5=0} that you wrote,
you can do it with an DFA that consists of a cycle of 5 states.
The transitions are, if you read a go clockwise if you read b go counter-clocwise. Choose at random one state to be initial state and the same state will be the final state.
For the language L={A^n B^m C^k | n,k>0 and m>3}, it should be easy to find out
if you read L as L=A(A)* B(B)* c^4(C)*
For the language that accepts different number of character in the string (let's say over a,b). The language should be R={ w in {a,b}* : #a(w) not equal #b(w)}
This language again it cannot be recognized by an NFA. If this language was regular (recognzied by an NFA) so would be this language:
L=a*b* intersection (R complement). The language L is {a^n b^n/ n non-negative integer}.
The language L is the first example of most books when they speak about languages that are non-regular.
Hopefully, you will find this answer helpful.
Given L1 context free non regular language.
Given L2 regular language.
Is it possible that L1 U L2 = regular language ?
Also, is it possible that L1*L2 = regular language ?
I think that the 2nd one is impossible. But I'm not sure.
Would love to see an example if one of the abovementioned statements (or both) is/are true.
Is it possible that L1 U L2 = regular language ?
Yes, Possible.
A simple case is: if L1 is sub-set of L2 then L1 U L2 will be regular (=L2), for example: L1 : { anbn | where n >= 0 } and L2 = (a + b)*
is it possible that L1 * L2 = regular language ?
No, Concatenation of a context-free and Regular will be context-free (because constraint in pattern of L1 is still there in L1 * L2).
Adding a reference: CS 273: Closure Properties for Context-Free Languages
Is it possible that L1 U L2 = regular language ?
Yes, it is possible.
But its always better to take an example:
L1 = {0*1*} (regular) and L2 = {0^n1^n |n>=0} (context-free).
L = L1 U L2 = {0*1*} which is regular language but since every regular language is context-free. So, we can say the union of two always results in context-free language.
Is it possible that L1·L2 = regular language ?
the concatenation of a regular and a context-free language always results in a context-free language.Take the above example again:
L = L1·L2 = {(0*1*)·(0^n1^n) |n>=0} (context free).
It can be regular too if for example one of L1 or L2 is Ø, L1·L2 will result in Ø (regular). But since, all regular languages are context-free, Ø is also a context-free.
Check this out: Geeks for Geeks
yes, Concatenation of a context-free and Regular will be regular
take L1= a^nb^n which is CFL and take L2 = Ø which is regular.
so L1.L2 = (a^nb^n).Ø = Ø which is regular
Note: For concatenation of two language must be regular ,
there has to be atleast one language to be regular.