Module 35 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 12
About This Presentation
Title:

Module 35

Description:

... L1 and L2 are CFL's and the fact that for every CFG, there is an ... Two PDA's M1 and M2. Output. PDA M3 such that L(M3) = L(M1) intersection L(M2) PDA M1 ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:12
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 13
Provided by: erict9
Learn more at: http://www.cse.msu.edu
Category:
Tags: fact | module

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Module 35


1
Module 35
  • Attempt to prove that CFLs are closed under
    intersection
  • Review previous constructions
  • Translate previous constructions to current
    setting
  • Prove modified result

2
High Level Overview
3
CFL closed under set intersection
  • Let L1 and L2 be arbitrary CFLs
  • Let M1 and M2 be PDAs s.t. L(M1) L1, L(M2)
    L2
  • M1 and M2 exist by definition of L1 and L2 are
    CFLs and the fact that for every CFG, there is
    an equivalent PDA
  • Construct PDA M3 from PDAs M1 and M2
  • Argue L(M3) L1 intersect L2
  • There exists a PDA M3 s.t. L(M3) L1 intersect
    L2
  • L1 intersect L2 is a CFL

4
Visualization
  • Let L1 and L2 be arbitrary CFLs
  • Let M1 and M2 be PDAs s.t. L(M1) L1, L(M2)
    L2
  • M1 and M2 exist by definition of L1 and L2 are
    CFLs and the fact that for every CFG, there is
    an equivalent PDA
  • Construct PDA M3 from PDAs M1 and M2
  • Argue L(M3) L1 intersect L2
  • There exists a PDA M3 s.t. L(M3) L1 intersect
    L2
  • L1 intersect L2 is a CFL

CFL
5
Algorithm Specification
  • Input
  • Two PDAs M1 and M2
  • Output
  • PDA M3 such that L(M3) L(M1) intersection L(M2)

PDA M1 PDA M2
PDA M3
6
Review Previous Results
7
Underlying Idea
  • Previous Results
  • recursive languages are closed under set
    intersection
  • r.e. languages are closed under set intersection
  • regular languages are closed under set
    intersection
  • What is the idea underlying the constructions
    used to prove these previous results?

8
Implementation with FSAs
  • Given the basic idea underlying these
    constructions, how was this idea implemented in
    when dealing with FSAs?
  • That is, restate the construction used to prove
    that the regular languages are closed under set
    intersection.
  • Specify the output FSA in terms of the input FSAs

9
Applying previous approach to PDAs
10
Applying approach to PDAs
  • Given the basic idea underlying these
    constructions, try and implement this idea in a
    construction working with PDAs rather than
    FSAs.
  • That is, give a construction specifying how the
    output PDA is built out of the input PDAs

11
Problem
  • Describe what goes wrong when applying this idea
    to PDAs instead of FSAs.
  • Does this prove that CFLs are NOT closed under
    set intersection?

12
Modified Result
  • What happens if the inputs are 1 FSA and 1 PDA?
  • What modified result does the resulting
    construction prove?
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com