1 / 14

Incorporating Delta Rules

Learn how to restrict the resulting inferred language in clearing restarting automata by increasing the length of contexts or incorporating delta rules.

albertjohn
Download Presentation

Incorporating Delta Rules

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Peter Černo Incorporating Delta Rules

  2. About • Suppose we have a sample computation for (delta) clearing restarting automata. • Suppose that the inferred automaton accepts some wrong words. • There are two ways how to restrict the resulting inferred language: • We can increase k – the length of contexts. • We can change the sample computation by incorporating some delta rules.

  3. Example 1 • Consider the following sample computation: ¢abababababababab$ ⊢M¢abababababababb$ ⊢M ¢abababababbabb$ ⊢M¢abababbabbabb$ ⊢M ¢abbabbabbabb$ ⊢M¢abbabbabbab$ ⊢M ¢abbabbabab$ ⊢M¢abbababab$ ⊢M ¢abababab$ ⊢M¢abababb$ ⊢M ¢abbabb$ ⊢M¢abbab$ ⊢M ¢abab$ ⊢M¢abb$ ⊢M¢ab$ ⊢M¢ λ$ accept. • We can collect 15 reductions.

  4. Example 1 • For k = 4 we get the following instructions: • ({¢ab, abab}, a, {b$, babb}), • ({¢a, abba}, b, {b$, bab$, baba}), • (¢, ab, $). • For the resulting 4-cl-RA-automaton M the following holds: L(M)∩ {(ab)n | n>0} = {(ab)2m | m≥0}. • However, this does not work for smaller k.

  5. Example 1 • For k = 3 we get the following instructions: • ({¢ab, bab}, a, {b$, bab}), • ({¢a, bba}, b, {b$, bab}), • (¢, ab, $). • Now the resulting 3-cl-RA-automaton Maccepts the wrong word ababab: • ababab ⊢Mabbab ⊢Mabab ⊢Mabb ⊢Mab ⊢Mλ. • We blame the instruction(¢ab, a, bab) which caused the reduction: ababab ⊢Mabbab.

  6. Idea • Why? The instruction reduced the wrong word ababab to the correct word abbab. • abbab is ok– it is in the sample computation. • Idea: Let us replace the instruction: • ({¢ab, bab}, a, {b$, bab}) by the delta instruction: • ({¢ab, bab}, a→ Δ, {b$, bab}). • How does the sample computation change?

  7. Idea • The modified sample computation is now: ¢abababababababab$ ⊢M¢abababababababΔb $ ⊢M ¢abababababΔbabΔb $ ⊢M¢abababΔbabΔbabΔb $ ⊢M ¢abΔbabΔbabΔbabΔb $ ⊢M¢abΔbabΔbabΔbab$ ⊢M ¢abΔbabΔbabab$ ⊢M¢abΔbababab$ ⊢M ¢abababab$ ⊢M¢abababΔb $ ⊢M ¢abΔbabΔb $ ⊢M¢abΔbab$ ⊢M ¢abab$ ⊢M¢abΔb $ ⊢M¢ab$ ⊢M¢ λ$ accept. • Unfortunately, it does not help us if k = 3.

  8. Idea • Consider the following sample reduction: • abababΔb ⊢MabΔbabΔb • As you can see, this reduction also works with the word ababab: • ababab ⊢MabΔbab because the length of contexts is k = 3. • Is there any other way how to modify the instruction ({¢ab, bab}, a, {b$, bab}) ? • Yes, it is.

  9. Revised Idea • It is not enough to replace a single letter a : • ({¢ab, bab}, a→ Δ, {b$, bab}). • We have two simple choices for two letters: • ({¢ab, bab}, ab→ Δ, {$, ab}), • ({¢a, ba}, ba→ Δ, {b$, bab}). • We move one letter from the contextto the rule and thus extend the context horizon. • In the following we show how does the sample computation change in both cases.

  10. Case 1 • If we use ({¢ab, bab}, ab→ Δ, {$, ab}) we get the following new sample computation: ¢abababababababab$ ⊢M¢abababababababΔ$ ⊢M ¢abababababΔabΔ$ ⊢M¢abababΔabΔabΔ$ ⊢M ¢abΔabΔabΔabΔ$ ⊢M¢abΔabΔabΔab$ ⊢M ¢abΔabΔabab$ ⊢M¢abΔababab$ ⊢M ¢abababab$ ⊢M¢abababΔ$ ⊢M ¢abΔabΔ$ ⊢M¢abΔab$ ⊢M¢abab$ ⊢M ¢abΔ$ ⊢M¢ab$ ⊢M¢ λ$ accept.

  11. Case 1 • For k = 3 we get the following instructions: • ({¢ab, Δab}, Δ, {$, ab$, aba}), • ({¢ab, bab}, ab→ Δ, {$, abΔ}), • (¢, ab, $). • For the resulting 3-cl-RA-automaton M the following holds: L(M) = {(ab)2m | m≥0} ∪ {λ}. • Note that the symbol Δcodes the letter b from the original sample computation.

  12. Case 2 • If we use ({¢a, ba}, ba→ Δ, {b$, bab}) we get the following new sample computation: ¢abababababababab$ ⊢M¢ababababababaΔb $ ⊢M ¢ababababaΔbaΔb $ ⊢M¢ababaΔbaΔbaΔb $ ⊢M ¢aΔbaΔbaΔbaΔb $ ⊢M¢aΔbaΔbaΔbab$ ⊢M ¢aΔbaΔbabab$ ⊢M¢aΔbababab$ ⊢M ¢abababab$ ⊢M¢ababaΔb $ ⊢M ¢aΔbaΔb $ ⊢M¢aΔbab$ ⊢M¢abab$ ⊢M ¢aΔb $ ⊢M¢ab$ ⊢M¢ λ$ accept.

  13. Case 2 • For k = 3 we get the following instructions: • ({¢a, Δba}, Δ, {b$, bab}), • ({¢a, aba}, ba→ Δ, {b$, baΔ}), • (¢, ab, $). • For the resulting 3-cl-RA-automaton M the same formula holds: L(M) = {(ab)2m | m≥0} ∪ {λ} . • Again the symbol Δcodes the letter b from the original sample computation.

  14. Some Remarks • Note that the for k < 3 the previous algorithm does not work. • It is also not obvious how to replace more letters or even more instructions without disturbing the sample computation. • The question is whether we can do these replacements in some automated way? • Is this idea applicable to other examples?

More Related