How does one use the Nerode-Myhill theorem to prove that a language is regular?












1












$begingroup$


Showing that a language is not regular is straight-forward, because all one needs to do is find an infinite set of inputs which has an injective mapping to the set of equivalence classes which compose that language.



How does one show that the set of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite? For instance, how would one show that the simple language $L = {s: |s| equiv 0 mod 2}$ has a finite number of equivalence classes?



I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.






complexity-theory computability regular-languages







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    Showing that a language is not regular is straight-forward, because all one needs to do is find an infinite set of inputs which has an injective mapping to the set of equivalence classes which compose that language.



    How does one show that the set of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite? For instance, how would one show that the simple language $L = {s: |s| equiv 0 mod 2}$ has a finite number of equivalence classes?



    I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.






    complexity-theory computability regular-languages







    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      Showing that a language is not regular is straight-forward, because all one needs to do is find an infinite set of inputs which has an injective mapping to the set of equivalence classes which compose that language.



      How does one show that the set of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite? For instance, how would one show that the simple language $L = {s: |s| equiv 0 mod 2}$ has a finite number of equivalence classes?



      I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.






      complexity-theory computability regular-languages







      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Showing that a language is not regular is straight-forward, because all one needs to do is find an infinite set of inputs which has an injective mapping to the set of equivalence classes which compose that language.



      How does one show that the set of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite? For instance, how would one show that the simple language $L = {s: |s| equiv 0 mod 2}$ has a finite number of equivalence classes?



      I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.






      complexity-theory computability regular-languages




      complexity-theory computability regular-languages






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked 4 hours ago









      AleksandrAleksandr

      153




      153






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$

          It is just as straightforward to show a language is regular using Nerod-Myhill theorem as to show a language is not regular using that theorem since Nerode-Myhill theorem characterizes when a language is a regular.



          For example, let us take the simple language $L={s: |s|equiv 0 text{ (mod 2)}}$. There are two equivalent classes of $L$, assuming $a$ is a letter in the alphabet.




          • $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 0text{ (mod 2)}right}$

          • $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 1text{ (mod 2)}right}$


          It should be easy for you to show that the above two classes are well-defined equivalence classes of $L$. There are no other equivalence class of $L$, since every word belongs to one of two classes. If a word is of even length, it belongs to class $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}$; otherwise, it belongs to class $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}$.



          Hence, there are two equivalence classes of $L$ in total. That is, the number of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite. According to the Nerode-Myhill theorem, $L$ must be regular.




          I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.




          I am not sure which surjective mapping you are talking about.



          As you can see from the example above, it is enough to show that the union of the finitely many equivalence classes you have found contains all words. Why? If we have another equivalence class $E,$ let $win E$. Then $w$ must belong to $F$, one of the equivalence classes you have found. Since $E$ and $F$ share one word, they are the same equivalence class. That is, $E$ has been found.



          You may want to check a few related questions and answers such as finding separating words (Nerode) and how I can find all equivalence classes by Myhill-Nerode?.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "419"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcs.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f104571%2fhow-does-one-use-the-nerode-myhill-theorem-to-prove-that-a-language-is-regular%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            3












            $begingroup$

            It is just as straightforward to show a language is regular using Nerod-Myhill theorem as to show a language is not regular using that theorem since Nerode-Myhill theorem characterizes when a language is a regular.



            For example, let us take the simple language $L={s: |s|equiv 0 text{ (mod 2)}}$. There are two equivalent classes of $L$, assuming $a$ is a letter in the alphabet.




            • $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 0text{ (mod 2)}right}$

            • $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 1text{ (mod 2)}right}$


            It should be easy for you to show that the above two classes are well-defined equivalence classes of $L$. There are no other equivalence class of $L$, since every word belongs to one of two classes. If a word is of even length, it belongs to class $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}$; otherwise, it belongs to class $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}$.



            Hence, there are two equivalence classes of $L$ in total. That is, the number of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite. According to the Nerode-Myhill theorem, $L$ must be regular.




            I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.




            I am not sure which surjective mapping you are talking about.



            As you can see from the example above, it is enough to show that the union of the finitely many equivalence classes you have found contains all words. Why? If we have another equivalence class $E,$ let $win E$. Then $w$ must belong to $F$, one of the equivalence classes you have found. Since $E$ and $F$ share one word, they are the same equivalence class. That is, $E$ has been found.



            You may want to check a few related questions and answers such as finding separating words (Nerode) and how I can find all equivalence classes by Myhill-Nerode?.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$


















              3












              $begingroup$

              It is just as straightforward to show a language is regular using Nerod-Myhill theorem as to show a language is not regular using that theorem since Nerode-Myhill theorem characterizes when a language is a regular.



              For example, let us take the simple language $L={s: |s|equiv 0 text{ (mod 2)}}$. There are two equivalent classes of $L$, assuming $a$ is a letter in the alphabet.




              • $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 0text{ (mod 2)}right}$

              • $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 1text{ (mod 2)}right}$


              It should be easy for you to show that the above two classes are well-defined equivalence classes of $L$. There are no other equivalence class of $L$, since every word belongs to one of two classes. If a word is of even length, it belongs to class $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}$; otherwise, it belongs to class $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}$.



              Hence, there are two equivalence classes of $L$ in total. That is, the number of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite. According to the Nerode-Myhill theorem, $L$ must be regular.




              I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.




              I am not sure which surjective mapping you are talking about.



              As you can see from the example above, it is enough to show that the union of the finitely many equivalence classes you have found contains all words. Why? If we have another equivalence class $E,$ let $win E$. Then $w$ must belong to $F$, one of the equivalence classes you have found. Since $E$ and $F$ share one word, they are the same equivalence class. That is, $E$ has been found.



              You may want to check a few related questions and answers such as finding separating words (Nerode) and how I can find all equivalence classes by Myhill-Nerode?.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$
















                3












                3








                3





                $begingroup$

                It is just as straightforward to show a language is regular using Nerod-Myhill theorem as to show a language is not regular using that theorem since Nerode-Myhill theorem characterizes when a language is a regular.



                For example, let us take the simple language $L={s: |s|equiv 0 text{ (mod 2)}}$. There are two equivalent classes of $L$, assuming $a$ is a letter in the alphabet.




                • $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 0text{ (mod 2)}right}$

                • $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 1text{ (mod 2)}right}$


                It should be easy for you to show that the above two classes are well-defined equivalence classes of $L$. There are no other equivalence class of $L$, since every word belongs to one of two classes. If a word is of even length, it belongs to class $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}$; otherwise, it belongs to class $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}$.



                Hence, there are two equivalence classes of $L$ in total. That is, the number of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite. According to the Nerode-Myhill theorem, $L$ must be regular.




                I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.




                I am not sure which surjective mapping you are talking about.



                As you can see from the example above, it is enough to show that the union of the finitely many equivalence classes you have found contains all words. Why? If we have another equivalence class $E,$ let $win E$. Then $w$ must belong to $F$, one of the equivalence classes you have found. Since $E$ and $F$ share one word, they are the same equivalence class. That is, $E$ has been found.



                You may want to check a few related questions and answers such as finding separating words (Nerode) and how I can find all equivalence classes by Myhill-Nerode?.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                It is just as straightforward to show a language is regular using Nerod-Myhill theorem as to show a language is not regular using that theorem since Nerode-Myhill theorem characterizes when a language is a regular.



                For example, let us take the simple language $L={s: |s|equiv 0 text{ (mod 2)}}$. There are two equivalent classes of $L$, assuming $a$ is a letter in the alphabet.




                • $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 0text{ (mod 2)}right}$

                • $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}=left{s: |s|equiv 1text{ (mod 2)}right}$


                It should be easy for you to show that the above two classes are well-defined equivalence classes of $L$. There are no other equivalence class of $L$, since every word belongs to one of two classes. If a word is of even length, it belongs to class $left[epsilonright]_{equiv_{L}}$; otherwise, it belongs to class $left[aright]_{equiv_{L}}$.



                Hence, there are two equivalence classes of $L$ in total. That is, the number of equivalence classes of $L$ is finite. According to the Nerode-Myhill theorem, $L$ must be regular.




                I think that showing that there is a surjective mapping is not sufficient, because the image may still be of infinite size.




                I am not sure which surjective mapping you are talking about.



                As you can see from the example above, it is enough to show that the union of the finitely many equivalence classes you have found contains all words. Why? If we have another equivalence class $E,$ let $win E$. Then $w$ must belong to $F$, one of the equivalence classes you have found. Since $E$ and $F$ share one word, they are the same equivalence class. That is, $E$ has been found.



                You may want to check a few related questions and answers such as finding separating words (Nerode) and how I can find all equivalence classes by Myhill-Nerode?.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited 2 hours ago

























                answered 4 hours ago









                Apass.JackApass.Jack

                10.9k1939




                10.9k1939






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Computer Science Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid …



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcs.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f104571%2fhow-does-one-use-the-nerode-myhill-theorem-to-prove-that-a-language-is-regular%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Fluorita

                    Image
                    Fluorita Fluorita (blau) amb pirita (daurat). Fórmula química CaF 2 Epònim fluor Localitat tipus Jáchymov Classificació Categoria Halurs Nickel-Strunz 10a ed. 3.AB.25 Nickel-Strunz 9a ed. 3.AB.25 Nickel-Strunz 8a ed. III/A.08 Dana 9.2.1.1 Heys 8.4.7 Propietats Sistema cristal·lí Cúbic Hàbit cristal·lí Sol presentar cubs; menys freqüentment dodecaedres. De vegades hexaoctaedres i tetrahexaedres. Per la combinació d'aquestes formes, les arestes dels cubs són sovint modificades. De vegades els cristalls poden presentar diferències de creixement entre les cares. Sovint s'observen cristalls compostos per sobrecreixement. Pot ser massiva, compacta, terrosa, columnar (poc freqüent), globular en agregats o botroïdal. Estructura cristal·lina a = 5.4626Å Simetria Classe (H-M): m 3 m (4/ m 3 2/ m ) - Hexoctaèdric; Grup espacial: Fm 3 m Color Blanc, groc, verd, violeta, vermell, rosa, blau o negre Mac...
                    Read more

                    Hulsita

                    Image
                    Hulsita Hulsita de la localitat tipus Fórmula química Fe 2+ 2 Fe 3+ O 2 BO 3 Epònim Alfred Hulse Brooks Localitat tipus mont Brooks, península de Seward, Nome Borough, Alaska, Estats Units Classificació Categoria borats Nickel-Strunz 10a ed. 6.AB.45 Nickel-Strunz 9a ed. 6.AB.45 Nickel-Strunz 8a ed. V/G.03 Dana 24.2.3.1 Heys 9.6.4 Propietats Sistema cristal·lí monoclínic Estructura cristal·lina a = 10,68Å; b = 3,09Å; c = 5,43Å; β = 94,15° Color negre Macles en [001]; un membre de la macla es troba girat 120° en relació a l'altre Exfoliació bona en {110} Duresa 3 Lluïssor vítria, submetàl·lica Densitat 4,28 g/cm 3 (mesurada); Més informació Estatus IMA mineral heretat (G) i mineral heretat (G) Any d'aprovació 1908 Referències [1] La hulsita és un mineral de la classe dels borats, que pertany al grup de la pinakiolita. Rep el seu nom en honor del nord-americà ...
                    Read more

                    Península de Txukotka

                    Image
                    Península de Txukotka Tipus Península Ubicació 66° N, 172° O  /  66°N , 172°O  / 66; -172 Mar mar dels Txuktxis La península de Txukotka a l'extrem oriental de Sibèria La península de Txukotka o península dels Txuktxis (en rus Чуко́тский полуо́стров , Txukotski poluóstrov ) és una península que es troba a l'extrem oriental d'Euràsia. Contingut 1 Descripció 2 Població 3 Vegeu també 4 Bibliografia Descripció L'estret de Bering, entre la península de Txukotka i la península de Seward a Alaska Foto de satèl·lit de la zona amb la península de Txukotka a l'esquerra El seu punt més extrem és el cap Dezhnev a la vora del nucli d'Uelen, un dels poquíssims llocs habitats de la zona. Al nord limita amb el mar dels Txuktxis i amb el mar de Bering al sud i amb l'estret de Bering a l'est. A la costa sud es troben la badia de Sant Lawrence i la badia de Kresta. La penínsu...
                    Read more