When Simulation Meets Antichains (on Checking Language Inclusion of NFAs)


 Sharleen Hall
 3 years ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 When Simultion Meets Antichins (on Checking Lnguge Inclusion of NFAs) Prosh Aziz Abdull 1, YuFng Chen 1, Lukáš Holík 2, Richrd Myr 3, nd Tomáš Vojnr 2 1 Uppsl University 2 Brno University of Technology 3 University of Edinburgh Abstrct. We describe new nd more efficient lgorithm for checking universlity nd lnguge inclusion on nondeterministic finite word utomt (NFA) nd tree utomt (TA). To the best of our knowledge, the ntichinbsed pproch proposed by Wulf et l. ws the most efficient one so fr. Our ide is to exploit simultion reltion on the sttes of finite utomt to ccelerte the ntichinbsed lgorithms. Normlly, simultion reltion cn be obtined firly efficiently, nd it cn help the ntichinbsed pproch to prune out lrge portion of unnecessry serch pths. We evlute the performnce of our new method on NFA/TA obtined from rndom regulr expressions nd from the intermedite steps of regulr model checking. The results show tht our pproch significntly outperforms the previous ntichinbsed pproch in most of the experiments. 1 Introduction The lnguge inclusion problem for regulr lnguges is importnt in mny ppliction domins, e.g., forml verifiction. Mny verifiction problems cn be formulted s lnguge inclusion problem. For exmple, one my describe the ctul behviors of n implementtion in n utomton A nd ll of the behviors permitted by the specifiction in nother utomton B. Then, the problem of whether the implementtion meets the specifiction is equivlent to the problem L(A) L(B). Methods for proving lnguge inclusion cn be ctegorized into two types: those bsed on simultion (e.g., [6]) nd those bsed on the subset construction (e.g., [5, 8 10]). Simultionbsed pproches first compute simultion reltion on the sttes of two utomt A nd B nd then check if ll initil sttes of A cn be simulted by some initil stte of B. Since simultion cn be computed in polynomil time, simultionbsed methods re usully very efficient. Their min drwbck is tht they re incomplete. Simultion preorder implies lnguge inclusion, but not vicevers. On the other hnd, methods bsed on the subset construction re complete but inefficient becuse in mny cses they will cuse n exponentil blow up in the number of sttes. Recently, Wulf et l. [11] proposed the ntichinbsed pproch. To the best of our knowledge, it ws the most efficient one mong ll of the methods bsed on the subset construction. Although the ntichinbsed method significntly outperforms the clssicl subset construction, in mny cses, it still sometimes suffers from the exponentil blow up problem. In this pper, we describe new pproch tht nicely combines the simultionbsed nd the ntichinbsed pproches. The computed simultion reltion is used for pruning out unnecessry serch pths of the ntichinbsed method. To simplify the presenttion, we first consider the problem of checking universlity for word utomton A. In similr mnner to the clssicl subset construction, we
2 strt from the set of initil sttes nd serch for sets of sttes (here referred to s mcrosttes) which re not ccepting (i.e., we serch for counterexmple of universlity). The key ide is to define n esytocheck ordering on the sttes of A which implies lnguge inclusion (i.e., p q implies tht the lnguge of the stte p is included in the lnguge of the stte q). From, we derive n ordering on mcrosttes which we use in two wys to optimize the subset construction: (1) serching from mcrostte needs not continue in cse smller mcrostte hs lredy been nlyzed; nd (2) given mcrostte is represented by (the subset of) its mximl elements. In this pper, we tke the ordering to be the wellknown mximl simultion reltion on the utomton A. In fct, the ntichin lgorithm of [11] coincides with the specil cse where the ordering is the identity reltion. Subsequently, we describe how to generlize the bove pproch to the cse of checking lnguge inclusion between two utomt A nd B, by extending the ordering to pirs ech consisting of stte of A nd mcrostte of B. In the second prt of the pper, we extend our lgorithms to the cse of tree utomt. First, we define the notion of open trees which we use to chrcterize the lnguges defined by tuples of sttes of the tree utomton. We identify here new ppliction of the so clled upwrd simultion reltion from [1]. We show tht it implies (open tree) lnguge inclusion, nd we describe how we cn use it to optimize existing lgorithms for checking the universlity nd lnguge inclusion properties. We hve implemented our lgorithms nd crried out n extensive experimenttion using NFA obtined from severl different sources. These include NFA from rndom regulr expressions nd lso 1069 pirs of NFA generted from the intermedite steps of bstrct regulr model checking [4] while verifying the correctness of the bkery lgorithm, producerconsumer system, the bubble sort lgorithm, n lgorithm tht reverses circulr list, nd Petri net model of the reders/writers protocol. We hve lso considered treeutomt derived from intermedite steps of bstrct regulr tree model checking. The experiments show tht our pproch significntly outperforms the previous ntichinbsed pproch in lmost ll of the considered cses. (Furthermore, in those cses where simultion is sufficient to prove lnguge inclusion, our lgorithm hs polynomil running time.) The reminder of the pper is orgnized s follows. Section 2 contins some bsic definitions. In Section 3, we begin the discussion by pplying our ide to solve the universlity problem for NFA. The problem is simpler thn the lnguge inclusion problem nd thus we believe tht presenting our universlity checking lgorithm first mkes it esier for the reder to grsp the ide. The correctness proof of our universlity checking lgorithm is given in Section 4. In Section 5 we discuss our lnguge inclusion checking lgorithm for NFA. Section 6 defines bsic nottions for tree utomt nd in Section 7, we present the lgorithms for checking universlity nd lnguge inclusion for tree utomt. The experimentl results re described in Section 8. Finlly, in Section 9, we conclude the pper nd discuss further reserch directions. 2 Preliminries A Nondeterministic Finite Automton (NFA) A is tuple (Σ,Q,I,F,δ) where: Σ is n lphbet, Q is finite set of sttes, I Q is nonempty set of initil sttes, F Q is
3 set of finl sttes, nd δ Q Σ Q is the trnsition reltion. For convenience, we use p q to denote the trnsition from the stte p to the stte q with the lbel. A word u = u 1...u n is ccepted by A from the stte q 0 if there exists sequence u j q 0 u 1 q 1 u 2...u n q n such tht q n F nd q j 1 q j for ll 0 < j n. Define L(A)(q) := {u u is ccepted by A from the stte q} (the lnguge of the stte q in A). Define the lnguge L(A) of A s S q I L(A)(q). We sy tht A is universl if L(A) =Σ. Let A =(Σ,Q A,I A,F A,δ A ) nd B =(Σ,Q B,I B,F B,δ B ) be two NFAs. Define their union utomton A B :=(Σ,Q A Q B,I A I B,F A F B,δ A δ B ). We define the postimge of stte Post(p) := {p Σ : (p,, p ) δ}. A simultion on A =(Σ,Q,I,F,δ) is reltion Q Q such tht p r only if (i) p F = r F nd (ii) for every trnsition p p, there exists trnsition r r such tht p r. It cn be shown tht for ech utomton A =(Σ,Q,I,F,δ), there exists unique mximl simultion. The following is wellknown lemm. Lemm 1. Given simultion on n NFA A, p r = L(A)(p) L(A)(r). For convenience, we cll set of sttes in A mcrostte, i.e., mcrostte is subset of Q. A mcrostte is ccepting if it contins t lest one ccepting stte, otherwise it is rejecting. For mcrostte P, define L(A)(P) := S p P L(A)(p). We sy tht mcrostte P is universl if L(A)(P)=Σ. For two mcrosttes P nd R, we write P R s shorthnd for p P. r R : p r. We define the postimge of mcrostte Post(P) := {P Σ : P = {p p P : (p,, p ) δ}}. We use A to denote the set of reltions over the sttes of A tht implies lnguge inclusion, i.e., if A, then we hve p r = L(A)(p) L(A)(r). 3 Universlity of NFAs The universlity problem for n NFA A =(Σ,Q,I,F,δ) is to decide whether L(A) = Σ. The problem is PSPACEcomplete. The clssicl lgorithm for the problem first determinizes A with the subset construction nd then checks if every rechble mcrostte is ccepting. The lgorithm is inefficient since in mny cses the determiniztion will cuse n exponentil blowup in the number of sttes. Note tht for universlity checking, we cn stop the subset construction immeditely nd conclude tht A is not universl whenever rejecting mcrostte is encountered. An exmple of run of this lgorithm is given in Fig. 1. The utomton A used in Fig. 1 is universl becuse ll rechble mcrosttes re ccepting. In this section, we propose more efficient pproch to universlity checking. In similr mnner to the clssicl lgorithm, we run the subset construction procedure nd check if ny rejecting mcrostte is rechble. However, our lgorithm ugments the subset construction with two optimiztions, henceforth referred to s Optimiztion 1 nd Optimiztion 2, respectively. Optimiztion 1 is bsed on the fct tht if the lgorithm encounters mcrostte R whose lnguge is superset of the lnguge of visited mcrostte P, then there is no need to continue the serch from R. The intuition behind this is tht if word is not ccepted from R, then it is lso not ccepted from P. For instnce, in Fig. 1(b), the serch needs not continue from the mcrostte {s 2,s 3 } since its lnguge is superset of the lnguge of the initil mcrostte {s 1,s 2 }. However, in generl it is difficult to
4 Clssicl b s 1 b s 2 b b s 3 b () Source NFA A s 1 s 2 s 1 (c) Optimiztion 1 nd 2 b b s 4 s2,s3 Antichin Optimiztion 1 s1,s2 s1,s2,s4 b b s1,s3 s2,s3 s2,s3 s1,s2,s3,s4 b b s1,s2 s1,s3 s1,s2,s3 s1,s2,s3,s4 b s1,s2,s3 b s1,s2,s3,s4 (b) A run of the lgorithms. The res lbeled Optimiztion 1, Antichin, Clssicl re the mcrosttes generted by our pproch with the mximl simultion nd Optimiztion 1, the ntichinbsed pproch, nd the clssicl pproch, respectively. Fig. 1. Universlity Checking Algorithms check if L(A)(P) L(A)(R) before the resulting DFA is completely built. Therefore, we suggest to use n esytocompute lterntive bsed on the following lemm. Lemm 2. Let P, R be two mcrosttes, A be n NFA, nd be reltion in A. Then, P R implies L(A)(P) L(A)(R). Note tht in Lemm 2, cn be ny reltion on the sttes of A tht implies lnguge inclusion. This includes ny simultion reltion (Lemm 1). When is the mximl simultion or the identity reltion, it cn be efficiently obtined from A before the subset construction lgorithm is triggered nd used to prune out unnecessry serch pths. An exmple of how the described optimiztion cn help is given in Fig. 1(b). If is the identity, the universlity checking lgorithm will not continue the serch from the mcrostte {s 1,s 2,s 4 } becuse it is superset of the initil mcrostte. In fct, the ntichinbsed pproch [11] cn be viewed s specil cse of our pproch when is the identity. Notice tht, in this cse, only 7 mcrosttes re generted (the clssicl lgorithm genertes 13 mcrosttes). When is the mximl simultion, we do not need to continue from the mcrostte {s 2,s 3 } either becuse s 1 s 3 nd hence {s 1,s 2 } {s 2,s 3 }. In this cse, only 3 mcrosttes re generted. As we cn see from the exmple, better reduction of the number of generted sttes cn be chieved when weker reltion (e.g., the mximl simultion) is used. Optimiztion 2 is bsed on the observtion tht L(A)(P)=L(A)(P\{p 1 }) if there is some p 2 P with p 1 p 2. This fct is simple consequence of Lemm 2 (note tht P P \{p 1 }). Since the two mcrosttes P nd P \{p 1 } hve the sme lnguge, if word is not ccepted from P, it is not ccepted from P \{p 1 } either. On the other hnd, if ll words in Σ cn be ccepted from P, then they cn lso be ccepted from P \{p 1 }. Therefore, it is sfe to replce the mcrostte P with P \{p 1 }. Consider the exmple in Fig. 1. If is the mximl simultion reltion, we cn remove the stte s 2 from the initil mcrostte {s 1,s 2 } without chnging its lnguge,
5 Algorithm 1: Universlity Checking Input: An NFA A =(Σ,Q,I,F,δ) nd reltion A. Output: TRUE if A is universl. Otherwise, FALSE. if I is rejecting then return FALSE; Processed:=/0; Next:={Minimize(I)}; while Next = /0 do Pick nd remove mcrostte R from Next nd move it to Processed; forech P {Minimize(R ) R Post(R)} do if P is rejecting then return FALSE; else if S Processed Next s.t. S P then Remove ll S from Processed Next s.t. P S; Add P to Next; 11 return TRUE becuse s 2 s 1. This chnge will propgte to ll the serching pths. With this optimiztion, our pproch will only genertes 3 mcrosttes, ll of which re singletons. The result fter pply the two optimiztions re pplied is shown in Fig. 1(c). Algorithm 1 describes our pproch in pseudocode. In this lgorithm, the function Minimize(R) implements Optimiztion 2. The function does the following: it chooses new stte r 1 from R, removes r 1 from R if there exists stte r 2 in R such tht r 1 r 2, nd then repets the procedure until ll of the sttes in R re processed. Lines 8 10 of the lgorithm implement Optimiztion 1. Overll, the lgorithm works s follows. Till the set Next of mcrosttes witing to be processed is nonempty (or rejecting mcrostte is found), the lgorithm chooses one mcrostte from Next, nd moves it to the Processed set. Moreover, it genertes ll successors of the chosen mcrostte, minimizes them, nd dds them to Next unless there is lredy some smller mcrostte in Next or in Processed. If new mcrostte is dded to Next, the lgorithm t the sme time removes ll bigger mcrosttes from both Next nd Processed. Note tht the pruning of the Next nd Processed sets together with checking whether new mcrostte should be dded into Next cn be done within single itertion through Next nd Processed. We discuss correctness of the lgorithm in the next section. 4 Correctness of the Optimized Universlity Checking In this section, we prove correctness of Algorithm 1. Due to the spce limittion, we only present n overview. A more detiled proof cn be found in Appendix A. Let A =(Σ,Q,I,F,δ) be the input utomton. We first introduce some definitions nd nottions tht will be used in the proof. For mcrostte P, define Dist(P) N { } s the length of the shortest word in Σ tht is not in L(A)(P) (if L(A)(P) =Σ, Dist(P) = ). For set of mcrosttes MSttes, the function Dist(MSttes) N { } returns the length of the shortest word in Σ tht is not in the lnguge of some mcrostte in MSttes. More precisely, if MSttes = /0, Dist(MSttes)=, otherwise, Dist(MSttes)=min P MSttes Dist(P). The predicte Univ(MSttes) is true if nd only if ll the mcrosttes in MSttes re universl, i.e., P MSttes : L(A)(P)=Σ.
6 Lemm 3 describes the invrints used to prove the prtil correctness of Alg. 1. Lemm 3. The below two loop invrints hold in Algorithm 1: 1. Univ(Processed Next) = Univ({I}). 2. Univ({I}) = Dist(Processed) > Dist(Next). Due to the finite number of mcrosttes, we cn show tht Algorithm 1 eventully termintes. Algorithm 1 returns FALSE only if either the set of initil sttes is rejecting, or the minimized version of some successor R of mcrostte R chosen from Next on line 5 is found rejecting. In the ltter cse, due to Lemm 2, R is lso rejecting. Then, R is nonuniversl, nd hence Univ(Processed Next) is flse. By Lemm 3 (Invrint 1), we hve A is not universl. The lgorithm returns TRUE only when Next becomes empty. When Next is empty, Dist(Processed) > Dist(Next) is not true. Therefore, by Lemm 3 (Invrint 2), A is universl. This gives the following theorem. Theorem 1. Algorithm 1 lwys termintes nd returns TRUE iff the input utomton A is universl. 5 The Lnguge Inclusion Problem The technique described in Section 3 cn be generlized to solve the lngugeinclusion problem. Let A nd B be two NFAs. The lnguge inclusion problem for A nd B is to decide whether L(A) L(B). This problem is lso PSPACEcomplete. The clssicl lgorithm for solving this problem builds onthefly the product utomton A B of A nd the complement of B nd serches for n ccepting stte. A stte in the product utomton A B is pir (p,p) where p is stte in A nd P is mcrostte in B. For convenience, we cll such pir (p, P) productstte. A productstte is ccepting iff p is n ccepting stte in A nd P is rejecting mcrostte in B. We use L(A,B)(p,P) to denote the lnguge of the productstte (p,p) in A B. The lnguge of A is not contined in the lnguge of B iff there exists some ccepting productstte (p, P) rechble from some initil productstte. Indeed, L(A, B)(p, P) =L(A)(p) \ L(B)(P), nd the lnguge of A B consists of words which cn be used s witnesses of the fct tht L(A) L(B) does not hold. In similr mnner to universlity checking, the lgorithm cn stop the serch immeditely nd conclude tht the lnguge inclusion does not hold whenever n ccepting productstte is encountered. An exmple of run of the clssicl lgorithm is given in Fig. 2. We find tht L(A) L(B) is true nd the lgorithm genertes 13 productsttes (Fig. 2(c), the re lbeled Clssicl ). Optimiztion 1 tht we use for universlity checking cn be generlized for lnguge inclusion checking s follows. Let A =(Σ,Q A,I A,F A,δ A ) nd B =(Σ,Q B,I B,F B, δ B ) be two NFAs such tht Q A Q B = /0. We denote by A B the NFA (Σ,Q A Q B,I A I B,F A F B,δ A δ B ). Let be reltion in (A B). During the process of constructing the product utomton nd serching for n ccepting productstte, we cn stop the serch from productstte (p,p) if () there exists some visited productstte (r,r) such tht p r nd R P, or (b) p P : p p. Optimiztion 1() is justified by Lemm 4, which is very similr to Lemm 2 for universlity checking. Lemm 4. Let A, B be two NFAs, (p,p), (r,r) be two productsttes, where p, r re sttes in A nd P, R re mcrosttes in B, nd be reltion in (A B). Then, p r nd R P implies L(A,B)(p,P) L(A,B)(r,R).
7 p 1,b () NFA A q 1,b (b) NFA B p 2 q 2 Clssicl Antichin Optimiztion 1(b) p1,{q1} Optimiztion 1() p1,{q2} p2,{q2} b p1,{q1,q2} p2,{q1,q2} p1,{q1,q2} p2,{q1,q2} p1,{q1} b p1,{q1,q2} p2,{q1,q2} p1,{q1,q2} p2,{q1,q2} p1,{q1} (c) A run of the lgorithms while checking L(A) L(B). Fig. 2. Lnguge Inclusion Checking Algorithms By the bove lemm, if word tkes the productstte (p,p) to n ccepting productstte, it will lso tke (r,r) to n ccepting productstte. Therefore, we do not need to continue the serch from (p,p). Let us use Fig. 2(c) to illustrte Optimiztion 1(). As we mentioned, the ntichinbsed pproch cn be viewed s specil cse of our pproch when is the identity. When is the identity, we do not need to continue the serch from the productstte (p 2,{q 1,q 2 }) becuse {q 2 } {q 1,q 2 }. In this cse, the lgorithm genertes 8 productsttes (Fig. 2(c), the re lbeled Antichin ). In the cse tht is the mximl simultion, we do not need to continue the serch from productsttes (p 1,{q 2 }), (p 1,{q 1,q 2 }), nd (p 2,{q 1,q 2 }) becuse q 1 q 2 nd the lgorithm lredy visited the productsttes (p 1,{q 1 }) nd (p 2,{q 2 }). Hence, the lgorithm genertes only 6 productsttes (Fig. 2(c), the re lbeled Optimiztion 1() ). If the condition of Optimiztion 1(b) holds, we hve tht the lnguge of p (w.r.t. A) is subset of the lnguge of P (w.r.t. B). In this cse, for ny word tht tkes p to n ccepting stte in A, it lso tkes P to n ccepting mcrostte in B. Hence, we do not need to continue the serch from the productstte (p,p) becuse ll of its successor sttes re rejecting productsttes. Consider gin the exmple in Fig. 2(c). With Optimiztion 1(b), if is the mximl simultion on the sttes of A B, we do not need to continue the serch from the first productstte (p 1,{q 1 }) becuse p 1 q 1. In this cse, the lgorithm cn conclude tht the lnguge inclusion holds immeditely fter the first productstte is generted (Fig. 2(c), the re lbeled Optimiztion 1(b) ). Observe tht from Lemm 4, it holds tht for ny productstte (p,p) such tht p 1 p 2 for some p 1, p 2 P, L(A,B)(p,P) =L(A,B)(p,P \{p 1 }) (s P P \{p 1 }). Optimiztion 2 tht we used for universlity checking cn therefore be generlized for lnguge inclusion checking too. We give the pseudocode of our optimized inclusion checking in Algorithm 2, which is strightforwrd extension of Algorithm 1. In the lgorithm, the definition of the Minimize(R) function is the sme s wht we hve defined in Algorithm 1. The function Initilize(PSttes) pplies Optimiztion 1 on the set of productsttes PSttes to void unnecessry serching. More precisely, it returns mximl subset of PSttes such tht (1) for ny two elements (p,p), (q,q) in the subset, p q Q P nd (2) for ny element (p,p) in the subset, p P : p p. We define the postimge of productstte Post((p,P)) := {(p,p ) Σ : (p,, p ) δ,p = {p p P : (p,, p ) δ}}.
8 Algorithm 2: Lnguge Inclusion Checking Input: NFA A =(Σ,Q A,I A,F A,δ A ), B =(Σ,Q B,I B,F B,δ B ). A reltion (A B). Output: TRUE if L(A) L(B). Otherwise, FALSE. if there is n ccepting productstte in {(i,i B ) i I A } then return FALSE; Processed:=/0; Next:= Initilize({(i,Minimize(I B )) i I A }); while Next = /0 do Pick nd remove productstte (r,r) from Next nd move it to Processed; forech (p,p) {(r,minimize(r )) (r,r ) Post((r,R))} do if (p,p) is n ccepting productstte then return FALSE; else if p P s.t. p p then if (s,s) Processed Next s.t. p s S P then Remove ll (s,s) from Processed Next s.t. s p P S; Add (p,p) to Next; 12 return TRUE Correctness: Define Dist(P) N { } s the length of the shortest word in the lnguge of the productstte P or if the lnguge of P is empty. The vlue Dist(PSttes) N { } is the length of the shortest word in the lnguge of some productstte in PSttes or if PSttes is empty. The predicte Incl(PSttes) is true iff for ll productsttes (p,p) in PSttes, L(A)(p) L(B)(P). The correctness of Algorithm 2 cn now be proved in very similr wy to Algorithm 1, using the below invrints: 1. Incl(Processed Next) = Incl({(i,I B ) i I A }). 2. Incl({(i,I B ) i I A })= Dist(Processed) > Dist(Next). 6 Tree Automt Preliminries To be ble to present generliztion of the bove methods for the domin of tree utomt, we now introduce some needed preliminries on tree utomt. A rnked lphbet Σ is set of symbols together with rnking function # : Σ N. For Σ, the vlue #() is clled the rnk of. For ny n 0, we denote by Σ n the set of ll symbols of rnk n from Σ. Let ε denote the empty sequence. A tree t over rnked lphbet Σ is prtil mpping t : N Σ tht stisfies the following conditions: (1) dom(t) is finite, prefixclosed subset of N nd (2) for ech v dom(t), if #(t(v)) = n 0, then {i vi dom(t)} = {1,...,n}. Ech sequence v dom(t) is clled node of t. For node v, we define the i th child of v to be the node vi, nd the i th subtree of v to be the tree t such tht t (v )=t(viv ) for ll v N.Alef of t is node v which does not hve ny children, i.e., there is no i N with vi dom(t). We denote by T (Σ) the set of ll trees over the lphbet Σ. A (finite, nondeterministic, bottomup) tree utomton (bbrevited s TA in the sequel) is qudruple A =(Q,Σ,,F) where Q is finite set of sttes, F Q is set of finl sttes, Σ is rnked lphbet, nd is set of trnsition rules. Ech trnsition rule is triple of the form ((q 1,...,q n ),,q) where q 1,...,q n,q Q, Σ, nd #() =n. We use (q 1,...,q n ) q to denote tht ((q 1,...,q n ),,q). In the specil cse where n = 0, we spek bout the soclled lef rules, which we sometimes bbrevite s q.
9 Let A =(Q,Σ,,F) be TA. A run of A over tree t T (Σ) is mpping π : dom(t) Q such tht, for ech node v dom(t) of rity #(t(v)) = n where q = π(v), if q i = π(vi) for 1 i n, then hs rule (q 1,...,q n ) t(v) π q. We write t = q to denote π tht π is run of A over t such tht π(ε)=q. We use t = q to denote tht t = q for some run π. The lnguge ccepted by stte q is defined by L(A)(q)={t t = q}, while the lnguge of A is defined by L(A)= S q F L(A)(q). 7 Universlity nd Lnguge Inclusion of Tree Automt To optimize universlity nd inclusion checking on word utomt, we used reltions tht imply lnguge inclusion. For the cse of universlity nd inclusion checking on tree utomt, we now propose to use reltions tht imply inclusion of lnguges of the so clled open trees (i.e., lefless trees or equivlently trees whose leves re replced by specil symbol denoting hole ) tht re ccepted from tuples of tree utomt sttes. We formlly define the notion below. Notice tht in contrst to the notion of lnguge ccepted from stte of word utomton, which refers to possible futures of the stte, the notion of lnguge ccepted t stte of TA refers to possible psts of the stte. Our notion of lnguges of open trees ccepted from tuples of tree utomt sttes speks gin bout the future of sttes, which turns out useful when trying to optimize the (ntichinbsed) subset construction for TA. Consider specil symbol Σ with rnk 0, clled hole. An open tree over Σ is tree over Σ such tht ll its leves re lbeled 1 by. We use T (Σ) to denote the set of ll open trees over Σ. Given sttes q 1,...,q n Q nd n open tree t with leves v 1,...,v n, run π of A on t from (q 1,...,q n ) is defined in similr wy s the run on tree except tht for ech lef v i,1 i n, we hve π(v i )= π q i. We use t(q 1,...,q n ) = q to denote tht π is run of A on t from (q 1,...,q n ) such tht π(ε) =q. The nottion t(q 1,...,q n )= q is explined in similr mnner to runs on trees. Then, the lnguge of A ccepted from tuple (q 1,...,q n ) of sttes is L (A)(q 1,...,q n )={t T t(q 1,...,q n )= q for some q F}. Finlly, we define the lnguge ccepted from tuple of mcrosttes (P 1,...,P n ) Q n s the set L (A)(P 1,...,P n )= S {L (A)(q 1,...,q n ) (q 1,...,q n ) P 1... P n }.We define Post (q 1,...,q n ) := {q (q 1,...,q n ) q}. For tuple of mcrosttes, we let Post (P 1,...,P n ) := S {Post (q 1,...,q n ) (q 1,...,q n ) P 1 P n }. Let us use t to denote the open tree tht rises from tree t T (Σ) by replcing ll the lef symbols of t by nd let for every lef symbol Σ, I = {q q} is the so clled initil mcrostte. Lnguges ccepted t finl sttes of A correspond to the lnguges ccepted from tuples of initil mcrosttes of A s stted in Lemm 5. Lemm 5. Let t be tree over Σ with leves lbeled by 1,..., n. Then t L(A) if nd only if t L (A)(I 1,...,I n ). 7.1 Upwrd Simultion We now work towrds defining suitble reltions on sttes of TA llowing us to optimize the universlity nd inclusion checking. We extend reltions Q Q on sttes to tuples of sttes such tht (q 1,...,q n ) (r 1,...,r n ) iff q i r i for ech 1 i n. We define 1 Note tht no internl nodes of n open tree cn be lbeled by s #()=0.
10 the set A of reltions tht imply inclusion of lnguges of tuples of sttes such tht A iff (q 1,...,q n ) (r 1,...,r n ) implies L (A)(q 1,...,q n ) L (A)(r 1,...,r n ). We define n extension of simultion reltions on sttes of word utomt tht stisfies the bove property s follows. Upwrd simultion on A is reltion Q Q such tht if q r, then (1) q F = r F nd (2) if (q 1,...,q n ) q where q = q i, then (q 1,...,q i 1,r,q i+1,...,q n ) r where q r. Upwrd simultions were discussed in [1], together with n efficient lgorithm of computing them. 2 Lemm 6. For the mximl upwrd simultion on A, we hve A. The proof of this lemm cn be obtined s follows. We first show tht the mximl upwrd simultion hs the following property: If (q 1,...,q n ) q in A, then for every (r 1,...,r n ) with (q 1,...,q n ) (r 1,...,r n ), there is r Q such tht q r nd (r 1,...,r n ) r. From (q 1,...,q n ) q nd q 1 r 1, we hve tht there is some rule (r 1,q 2,...,q n ) s 1 such tht q s 1. From the existence of (r 1,q 2,...,q n ) s 1 nd from q 2 r 2, we then get tht there is some rule (r 1,r 2,q 3,...,q n ) s 2 such tht s 1 s 2, etc. Since the mximl upwrd simultion is trnsitive [1], we obtin the property mentioned bove. This in turn implies Lemm Tree Automt Universlity Checking We now show how upwrd simultions cn be used for optimized universlity checking on tree utomt. Let A =(Σ,Q,F, ) be tree utomton. We define Tn (Σ) s the set of ll open trees over Σ with n leves. We sy tht n ntuple (q 1,...,q n ) of sttes of A is universl if L (A)(q 1,...,q n )=Tn (Σ), this is, ll open trees with n leves constructible over Σ cn be ccepted from (q 1,...,q n ). A set of mcrosttes MSttes is universl if ll tuples in MSttes re universl. From Lemm 5, we cn deduce tht A is universl (i.e., L(A)=T (Σ)) if nd only if {I Σ 0 } is universl. The following Lemm llows us to design new TA universlity checking lgorithm in similr mnner to Algorithm 1 using Optimiztions 1 nd 2 from Section 3. Lemm 7. For ny A nd two tuples of mcrosttes of A, we hve (R 1,...,R n ) (P 1,...,P n ) implies L (A)(R 1,...,R n ) L (A)(P 1,...,P n ). Algorithm 3 describes our pproch to checking universlity of tree utomt in pseudocode. It resembles closely Algorithm 1. There re two min differences: (1) The initil vlue of the Next set is the result of pplying the function Initilize to the set {Minimize(I ) Σ 0 }. Initilize returns the set of ll mcrosttes in {Minimize(I ) Σ 0 }, which re miniml w.r.t. (i.e., those mcro sttes with the best chnce of finding counterexmple to universlity). (2) The computtion of the Postimge of set of mcrosttes is bit more complicted. More precisely, for ech symbol Σ n,n N, we hve to compute the post imge of ech ntuple of mcrosttes from the set. We design the lgorithm such tht we void computing the Postimge of tuple more thn once. We define the Postimge Post(MSttes)(R) of set of 2 In [1], upwrd simultions re prmeterized by some downwrd simultion. However, upwrd simultions prmeterized by downwrd simultion greter thn the identity cnnot be used in our frmework since they do not generlly imply inclusion of lnguges of tuples of sttes.
11 Algorithm 3: Tree Automt Universlity Checking Input: A tree utomton A =(Σ,Q,F, ) nd reltion A. Output: TRUE if A is universl. Otherwise, FALSE. if Σ 0 such tht I is rejecting then return FALSE; Processed:=/0; Next:= Initilize{Minimize(I ) Σ 0 }; while Next = /0 do Pick nd remove mcrostte R from Next nd move it to Processed; forech P {Minimize(R ) R Post(Processed)(R)} do if P is rejecting mcrostte then return FALSE; else if Q Processed Next s.t. Q P then Remove ll Q from Processed Next s.t. P Q; Add P to Next; 11 return TRUE mcrosttes MSttes w.r.t. mcrosttes R MSttes. It is the set of ll mcrosttes P = Post (P 1,...,P n ) where Σ n,n N nd R occurs t lest once in the tuple (P 1,...,P n ) MSttes. Formlly, Post(MSttes)(R) = S Σ{Post (P 1,...,P n ) n = #(),P 1,...,P n MSttes,R {P 1,...,P n }}. The following theorem sttes correctness of Algorithm 3, which cn be proved using similr invrints s in the cse of Algorithm 1 when the notion of distnce from n ccepting stte is suitbly defined (see Appendix B for more detils). Theorem 2. Algorithm 3 lwys termintes nd returns TRUE if nd only if the input tree utomton A is universl. 7.3 Tree Automt Lnguge Inclusion Checking We re interested in testing lnguge inclusion of two tree utomt A =(Σ,Q A,F A, A ) nd B =(Σ,Q B,F B, B ). From Lemm 5, we hve tht L(A) L(B) iff for every tuple 1,..., n of symbols from Σ 0, L (A)(I A 1,...,I A n ) L (B)(I B 1,...,I B n ). In other words, for ny 1,..., n Σ 0, every open tree tht cn be ccepted from tuple of sttes from I A 1... I A n cn lso be ccepted from tuple of sttes from I B 1... I B n. This justifies similr use of the notion of productsttes s in Section 5. We define the lnguge of tuple of productsttes s L (A,B)((q 1,P 1 ),...,(q n,p n )) := L (A)(q 1,...,q n ) \ L (B)(P 1,...,P n ). Observe tht we obtin tht L(A) L(B) iff the lnguge of every ntuple (for ny n N) of productsttes from the set {(i,i B ) Σ 0,i I A } is empty. Our lgorithm for testing lnguge inclusion of tree utomt will check whether it is possible to rech productstte of the form (q,p) with q F A nd P F B = /0 (tht we cll ccepting) from tuple of productsttes from {(i,i B ) Σ 0,i I A }. The following lemm llows us to use Optimiztion 1() nd Optimiztion 2 from Section 5.
12 Algorithm 4: Tree Automt Lnguge Inclusion Checking Input: TAs A nd B over n lphbet Σ. A reltion (A B). Output: TRUE if L(A) L(B). Otherwise, FALSE. if there exists n ccepting productstte in S Σ 0 {(i,i B ) i I A } then return FALSE; Processed:=/0; Next:=Initilize( S Σ 0 {(i,minimize(i B )) i I A }); while Next = /0 do Pick nd remove productstte (r,r) from Next nd move it to Processed; forech (p,p) {(r,minimize(r )) (r,r ) Post(Processed)(r,R)} do if (p,p) is n ccepting productstte then return FALSE; else if p P s.t. p p then if (q,q) Processed Next s.t. p q Q P then Remove ll (q,q) from Processed Next s.t. q p P Q; Add (p,p) to Next; 12 return TRUE Lemm 8. Let (A B). For ny two tuples of sttes nd two tuples of productsttes such tht (p 1,...,p n ) (r 1,...,r n ) nd (R 1,...,R n ) (P 1,...,P n ), we hve L (A,B)((p 1,P 1 ),...,(p n,p n )) L (A,B)((r 1,R 1 ),...,(r n,r n )). It is lso possible to use Optimiztion 1(b) where we stop serching from productsttes of the form (q,p) such tht q r for some r P. However, note tht this optimiztion is of limited use for tree utomt. Under the ssumption tht the utomt A nd B do not contin useless sttes, the reson is tht for ny q Q A nd r Q B, if q ppers t lefthnd side of some rule of rity more thn 1, then no reflexive reltion from (A B) llows q r. 3 Algorithm 4 describes our method for checking lnguge inclusion of TA in pseudocode. It closely follows Algorithm 2. It differs in two min points. First, the initil vlue of the Next set is the result of pplying the function Initilize on the set {(i,minimize(i B )) Σ 0,i I A }, where Initilize is the sme function s in Algorithm 2. Second, the computtion of the Post imge of set of productsttes mens tht for ech symbol Σ n,n N, we construct the Post imge of ech ntuple of productsttes from the set. Like in Algorithm 3, we design the lgorithm such tht we void computing the Post imge of tuple more thn once. We define the post imge Post(PSttes)(r, R) of set of productsttes PSttes w.r.t. productstte (r, R) PSttes. It is the set of ll productsttes (q,p) such tht there is some Σ,#()=n nd some ntuple ((q 1,P 1 ),...,(q n,p n )) of productsttes from PSttes tht contins t lest one occurrence of (r,r), where q Post (q 1,...,q n ) nd P = Post (P 1,...,P n ). Theorem 3. Algorithm 4 lwys termintes nd returns TRUE iff L(A) L(B). 3 To see this, ssume tht n open tree t is ccepted from (q 1,...,q n ) Q n A,q = q i,1 i n. If q r, then by the definition of, t L (A B)(q 1,...,q i 1,r,q i+1,...,q n ). However, tht cnnot hppen, s A B does not contin ny rules with left hnd sides contining both sttes from A nd sttes from B.
13 Antichin Simultion () Detiled results Size Antichin Simultion (b) Averge execution time for different NFA pir sizes (in seconds) Fig. 3. Lnguge inclusion checking on NFAs generted from regulr model checker 8 Experimentl Results In this section, we describe our experimentl results. We concentrted on experiments with inclusion checking, since it is more common thn universlity checking in vrious symbolic verifiction procedures, decision procedures, etc. We compred our pproch, prmeterized by mximl simultion (or, for tree utomt, mximl upwrd simultion), with the previous pure ntichinbsed pproch of [11], nd with clssicl subsetconstructionbsed pproch. We implemented ll the bove in OCml. We used the lgorithm in [7] for computing mximl simultions. In order to mke the figures esier to red, we often do not show the results of the clssicl lgorithm, since in ll of the experiments tht we hve done, the clssicl lgorithm performed much worse thn the other two pproches. 8.1 The Results on NFA For lnguge inclusion checking of NFA, we tested our pproch on exmples generted from the intermedite steps of tool for bstrct regulr model checking [4]. In totl, we hve 1069 pirs of NFA generted from different verifiction tsks, which included verifying version of the bkery lgorithm, system with prmeterized number of producers nd consumers communicting through doubleended queue, the bubble sort lgorithm, n lgorithm tht reverses circulr list, nd Petri net model of the reders/writers protocol (cf. [4, 3] for detiled description of the verifiction problems). In Fig. 3 (), the horizontl xis is the sum of the sizes of the pirs of utomt whose lnguge inclusion we check, nd the verticl xis is the execution time (the time for computing the mximl simultion is included). Ech point denotes result from inclusion testing for pir of NFA. Fig. 3 (b) shows the verge results for different NFA sizes. From the figure, one cn see tht our pproch hs much better performnce thn the ntichinbsed one. Also, the difference between our pproch nd the ntichinbsed pproch becomes lrger when the size of the NFA pirs increses. If we compre the verge results on the smllest 1000 NFA pirs, our pproch is 60% slower thn the the ntichinbsed pproch. For the lrgest NFA pirs (those with size lrger thn 5000), our pproch is 5.32 times fster thn the the ntichinbsed pproch. We lso tested our pproch using NFA generted from rndom regulr expressions. We hve two different tests: (1) lnguge inclusion does not lwys hold nd (2) lnguge inclusion lwys holds 4. The result of the first test is in Fig. 4(). In the figure, 4 To get sufficient number of tests for the second cse, we generte two NFA A nd B from rndom regulr expressions, build their union utomton C = A B, nd test L(A) L(C).
14 Simultion Antichin Simultion Antichin Clssicl () Lnguge inclusion does not lwys hold (b) Lnguge inclusion lwys holds Fig. 4. Lnguge inclusion checking on NFA generted from regulr expressions the horizontl xis is the sum of the sizes of the pirs of utomt whose lnguge inclusion we check, nd the verticl xis is the execution time (the time for computing the mximl simultion is included). From Fig. 4(), we cn see tht the performnce of our pproch is much more stble. It seldom produces extreme results. In ll of the cses we tested, it lwys termintes within 10 seconds. In contrst, the ntichinbsed pproch needs more thn 100 seconds in the worst cse. The result of the second test is in Fig. 4(b) where the horizontl xis is the length of the regulr expression nd the verticl xis is the verge execution time of 30 cses in milliseconds. From Fig. 4(b), we observe tht our pproch hs much better performnce thn the ntichinbsed pproch if the lnguge inclusion holds. When the length of the regulr expression is 900, our pproch is lmost 20 times fster thn the ntichinbsed pproch. When the mximl simultion reltion is given, nturl wy to ccelerte the lnguge inclusion checking is to use to minimize the size of the two input utomt by merging equivlent sttes. In this cse, the simultion reltion becomes sprser. A question rises whether our pproch hs still better performnce thn the ntichinbsed pproch in this cse. Therefore, we lso evluted our pproch under this setting. Here gin, we used the NFA pirs generted from bstrct regulr model checking [4]. The results show tht lthough the ntichinbsed pproch gins some speedup when combined with minimiztion, it is still slower thn our pproch. The min reson is tht in mny cses, simultion holds only in one direction, but not in the other. Our pproch cn lso utilize this type of reltion. In contrst, the minimiztion lgorithm merges only simultion equivlent sttes. We hve lso evluted the performnce of our pproch using bckwrd lnguge inclusion checking combined with mximl bckwrd simultion. As Wulf et l. [11] hve shown in their pper, bckwrd lnguge inclusion checking of two utomt is in fct equivlent to the forwrd version on the reversed utomt. This cn be esily generlized to our cse. The result is very consistent to wht we hve obtined; our lgorithm is still significntly better thn the ntichinbsed pproch. 8.2 The Results on TA For lnguge inclusion checking on TA, we tested our pproch on 86 tree utomt pirs generted from the intermedite steps of regulr tree model checker [2] while verifying the lgorithm of reblncing redblck trees fter insertion or deletion of lef
15 node. The results re given in Antichin Simultion Tble 1. Our pproch hs Size Diff. # of Pirs (sec.) (sec.) much better performnce when % 29 the size of TA pir is lrge % 15 For TA pirs of size smller % 14 thn 200, our pproch is on % 13 verge 1.39 times fster thn % 5 the ntichinbsed pproch % 10 However, for those of size Tble 1. Lnguge inclusion checking on TA bove 1000, our pproch is on verge 6.8 times fster thn the ntichinbsed pproch. 9 Conclusion We hve introduced severl originl wys to combine simultion reltions with ntichins in order to optimize lgorithms for checking universlity nd inclusion on NFA. We hve lso shown how the proposed techniques cn be extended to the domin of tree utomt. This ws chieved by introducing the notion of lnguges of open trees ccepted from tuples of tree utomt sttes nd using the mximl upwrd simultions prmeterized by the identity proposed in our erlier work [1]. We hve implemented the proposed techniques nd performed number of experiments showing tht our techniques cn provide very significnt improvement over currently known pproches. In the future, we would like to perform even more experiments, including, e.g., experiments where our techniques will be incorported into the entire frmework of bstrct regulr (tree) model checking or into some utomtbsed decision procedures. Aprt from tht, it is lso interesting to develop the described techniques for other clsses of utomt (notbly Büchi utomt) nd use them in setting where the trnsitions of the utomt re represented not explicitly but symboliclly, e.g., using BDDs. References 1. P.A. Abdull, A. Boujjni, L. Holík, L. Kti, nd T. Vojnr. Computing Simultions over Tree Automt. In Proc. of TACAS 08, LNCS 4963, A. Boujjni, P. Hbermehl, L. Holík, T. Touili, nd T. Vojnr. AntichinBsed Universlity nd Inclusion Testing over Nondet. Finite Tree Automt. In CIAA 08, LNCS 5148, A. Boujjni, P. Hbermehl, P. Moro, T. Vojnr. Verifying Progrms with Dynmic 1 SelectorLinked Structures in Regulr Model Checking. In TACAS 05, LNCS 3440, A. Boujjni, P. Hbermehl, nd T. Vojnr. Abstrct Regulr Model Checking. In Proc. of CAV 04, LNCS Springer, J. A. Brzozowski. Cnonicl Regulr Expressions nd Miniml Stte Grphs for Definite Events. In Mthemticl Theory of Automt, D. L. Dill, A. J. Hu, nd H. WongToi. Checking for Lnguge Inclusion Using Simultion Preorders. In Proc. of CAV 92, LNCS 575. Springer, L. Holík nd J. Šimáček. Optimizing n LTSSimultion Algorithm. Technicl Report FIT TR , Brno University of Technology, J. E. Hopcroft. An n.log n Algorithm for Minimizing Sttes in Finite Automton. Technicl Report CSTR , Stnford University, A. R. Meyer nd L. J. Stockmeyer. The Equivlence Problem for Regulr Expressions with Squring Requires Exponentil Spce. In Proc. of the 13th Annul Symposium on Switching nd Automt Theory. IEEE CS, F. Møller M. D. Wulf, L. Doyen, T. A. Henzinger, nd J.F. Rskin. Antichins: A New Algorithm for Checking Universlity of Finite Automt. In Proc. of CAV 06, LNCS Springer, 2006.
16 A Correctness of the NFA Universlity Checking The following lemm is implied directly by the fct tht if L(A)(P) L(A)(R), then the shortest word rejected by R is lso rejected by P. Lemm 9. Let P nd R be two mcrosttes such tht L(A)(P) L(A)(R). We hve Dist(P) Dist(R). Lemm 3. The below two loop invrints hold in Algorithm 1: 1. Univ(Processed Next) = Univ({I}). 2. Univ({I}) = Dist(Processed) > Dist(Next). Proof. It is trivil to see tht the invrints hold t the entry of the loop, tking into ccount Lemm 2 covering the effect of the Minimize function. We show tht the invrints continue to hold when the loop body is executed from configurtion of the lgorithm in which the invrints hold. We use Processed old nd Next old to denote the vlues of Processed nd Next when the control is on line 4 before executing the loop body nd we use Processed new nd Next new to denote their vlues when the control gets bck to line 4 fter executing the loop body once. We ssume tht Next old = /0. Let us strt with Invrint 1. Assume first tht Univ(Processed old Next old ) holds. Then, R must be universl, which holds lso for ll of its successors nd, due to Lemm 2, lso for their minimized versions, which my be dded to Next on line 10. Hence, Univ(Processed new Next new ) holds fter executing the loop body, nd thus Invrint 1 holds too. Now ssume tht Univ(Processed old Next old ) holds. Then, Univ({I}) holds, nd hence Invrint 1 must hold for Processed new nd Next new too. We proceed to Invrint 2 nd we ssume tht Univ({I}) holds (the other cse being trivil). Hence, Dist(Processed old ) > Dist(Next old ) holds. We distinguish two cses: 1. Dist(R)= or Q Processed old : Dist(Q) Dist(R). In this cse, Dist(Processed) will not decrese on line 5. From Dist(Processed old ) > Dist(Next old ), there exists some mcrostte R in Next old s.t. Dist(R )=Dist(Next old ) < Dist(Processed old ) Dist(Q) Dist(R). Therefore, Dist(Next) will not chnge on line 5 either. Moreover, for ny mcrostte P, removing Q s.t. P Q from Next nd Processed on line 9 nd then dding P to Next on line 10 cnnot invlidte Dist(Processed new ) > Dist(Next new ) since Dist(P) Dist(Q) due to Lemms 2 nd 9. Hence, Invrint 2 must hold for Processed new nd Next new too. 2. Dist(R) = nd Q Processed old : Dist(Q) Dist(R). In this cse, the vlue of Dist(Processed) decreses to Dist(R) on line 5. Clerly, Dist(R) = 0 or else we would hve terminted before. Then there must be some successor R of R which is either rejecting (nd the loop stops without getting bck to line 4) or one step closer to rejection, mening tht Dist(R ) < Dist(R). Moreover, R either ppers in Next new or there lredy exists some R Next old such tht R R, mening tht Dist(Processed new ) > Dist(Next new ). It is impossible tht R Processed old : R R, becuse R Processed old : Dist(R ) > Dist(R) > Dist(R ) nd from Lemms 2 nd 9, R R implies Dist(R ) < Dist(R ). Furthermore, if some mcrostte is removed from Processed on line 9, Dist(Processed) cn only grow, nd hence we re done.
17 Lemm 10 (Termintion). Algorithm 1 eventully termintes. Proof. For the lgorithm not to terminte, it would hve to be the cse tht some mcrostte is repetedly dded into Next. However, once some mcrostte R is dded into Next, there will lwys be some mcrostte Q Processed Next such tht Q R. This holds since R either stys in Next, moves to Procesed, or is replced by some Q such tht Q R in ech itertion of the loop. Hence, R cnnot be dded to Next for the second time since mcrostte is dded to Next on line 10 only if there is no Q Processed Next such tht Q R. Theorem 1. The lgorithm termintes with the return vlue FALSE if the input utomton A is not universl. Otherwise, it termintes with the return vlue TRUE. Proof. From Lemm 10, the lgorithm eventully termintes. It returns FALSE only if either the set of initil sttes is rejecting, or the minimized version R of some successor S of mcrostte R chosen from Next on line 5 is found rejecting. In the ltter cse, due to Lemm 2, S is lso rejecting. Then R is nonuniversl, nd hence Univ(Processed Next) is flse. By Lemm 3 (Invrint 1), we hve A is not universl. The lgorithm returns TRUE only when Next becomes empty. When Next is empty, Dist(Processed) > Dist(Next) is not true. Therefore, by Lemm 3 (Invrint 2), A is universl. B Correctness of the TA Universlity Checking In this section, we prove correctness of Algorithm 3 in very similr wy to Algorithm 1, using suitbly modified notions of distnces nd rnks. Let A =(Q,Σ,,F) be TA. For n 0 nd n ntuple of mcrosttes (Q 1,...,Q n ) where Q i Q for 1 i n, we let Dist(Q 1,...,Q n )=0 iff Q i F = /0 for some i {1,...,n}. We define Dist(Q 1,...,Q n )=k N + { } iff Q i F for ll i {1,...,n} nd k = min({ t t Tn (Σ) t L (A)(Q 1,...,Q n )}). Here, we ssume min(/0)=. For set MSttes of mcrosttes over Q, we let Rnk(MSttes)=min({Dist(Q 1,...,Q n ) n 1 1 i n : Q i MSttes}) nd we define Univ(MSttes) Rnk(MSttes)=. Lemm 11. The below two loop invrints hold in Algorithm 3: 1. Univ(Processed Next) = Univ({I Σ 0 }). 2. Univ({I Σ 0 })= Rnk(Processed) > Rnk(Processed Next). Proof. It is trivil to see tht the invrints hold t the entry of the loop, tking into ccount Lemm 7. We show tht the invrints continue to hold when the loop body is executed from configurtion of the lgorithm in which the invrints hold. We use Processed old nd Next old to denote the vlues of Processed nd Next when the control is on line 4 before executing the loop body nd we use Processed new nd Next new to denote their vlues when the control gets bck to line 4 fter executing the loop body once. We ssume tht Next old = /0. Let us strt with Invrint 1. Assume first tht Univ(Processed old Next old ) holds. Then, R cn pper within tuples constructed over Processed old Next old which re universl only. In such cse, ll mcrosttes Q rechble from ll tuples T built over
18 Processed old Next old re such tht when we dd them to Processed old Next old, the resulting set will still llow building universl tuples only. Otherwise, one could tke nonuniversl tuple contining some of the newly dded mcrosttes Q, replce Q by the tuple T from which it rose, nd obtin nonuniversl tuple over Processed old Next old, which is impossible. Hence, the possibility of dding the new mcrosttes to Next on line 10 cnnot cuse nonuniverslity of Processed new Next new, which due to Lemm 7 holds when dding the minimized mcrosttes too. Moreover, removing elements from Next or Processed cnnot cuse nonuniverslity either. Hence, Invrint 1 holds over Processed new nd Next new in this cse. Next, let us ssume tht Univ(Processed old Next old ) holds. Then, Univ({I Σ 0 }) holds, nd hence Invrint 1 must hold for Processed new nd Next new too. We proceed to Invrint 2 nd we ssume tht Univ({I Σ 0 }) holds (the other cse being trivil). Hence, Rnk(Processed old ) > Rnk(Processed old Next old ) holds. We distinguish two cses: 1. In order to build tuple T over Processed old nd Next old tht is of Dist equl to Rnk(Processed old Next old ), one needs to use mcrostte Q in Next old \{R}. The mcrostte Q stys in Next new or is replced by smller mcrostte dded to Next on line 10 tht, due to Lemm 7, cn only llow to build tuples of the sme or even smller Dist. Likewise, the mcrosttes ccompnying Q in T sty in Next new or Processed new or re replced by smller mcrosttes dded to Next on line 10 llowing to build tuples of the sme or smller Dist, due to Lemm 7. Hence, moving R to Processed on line 5 cnnot cuse the invrint to brek. Moreover, dding some further mcrosttes to Next on line 10 cn only cuse Rnk(Processed Next) to decrese while removing mcrosttes from Processed on line 9 cn only cuse Rnk(Processed) to grow. Finlly, replcing mcrostte in Next by smller one s combined effect of lines 9 nd 10 cn gin just decrese Rnk(Processed Next), due to Lemm 7. Hence, in this cse, Invrint 2 must hold over Processed new nd Next new. 2. One cn build some tuple T over Processed old nd Next old tht is of Dist equl to Rnk(Processed old Next old ) using Processed old {R} only. In this cse, there must be tuples constructible over Processed old {R} nd contining R tht re not universl. We cn distinguish the following subcses: () From some of the tuples built over Processed old {R} nd contining R, nonccepting mcrostte is reched vi single trnsition of A, nd the lgorithm stops without getting bck to line 4. (b) Otherwise, some of the mcrosttes tht pper in Post(Processed, R) nd tht will be dded in the minimized form to Next must llow one to construct tuples which re of Dist smller thn those bsed on R. This holds since if mcrostte Q is reched from some tuple T contining R by single trnsition, we cn replce T in lrger tuples leding to nonccepttion by Q, nd hence decrese the size of the open tree needed to rech nonccepttion. Tking into ccount Lemm 7 to cover the effect of the minimiztion nd using similr resoning s bove for covering the effect of lines 9 nd 10, it is then cler tht Invrint 2 will remin to hold in this cse.
19 Lemm 12. Algorithm 3 eventully termintes. Proof. An nlogy of the proof of Lemm 10. Theorem 2 cn now be proved in very similr wy s Theorem 1. C Correctness of the TA Lnguge Inclusion Checking We prove correctness of Algorithm 4 in very similr wy to Algorithm 2, using suitbly modified notions of distnces nd rnks. Let A =(Σ,Q A,F A, A ) nd B =(Σ,Q B,F B, B ) be two tree utomt. For n 0 nd n ntuple of mcrosttes ((q 1,P 1 ),...,(q n,p n )), we let Dist((q 1,P 1 ),...,(q n,p n )) = 0 iff ε L (A,B)((q 1,P 1 ),...,(q n,p n )). Otherwise we define Dist((q 1,P 1 ),...,(q n,p n )) = k N + { } iff k = min({ t t Tn (Σ) t L (A,B)((q 1,P 1 ),...,(q n,p n ))}). Here, we ssume min(/0) =. For set PSttes of productsttes, we let Rnk(PSttes) = min({dist((q 1,P 1 ),...,(q n,p n )) n 1 1 i n : (q i,p i ) PSttes}). The predicte Incl(PSttes) is defined to be true iff Rnk(PSttes)=. Lemm 13. The following two loop invrints hold in Algorithm 4: 1. Incl(Processed Next) = Incl( S Σ 0 {(i,i B ) i I A }). 2. Incl( S Σ 0 {(i,i B ) i I A }) = Rnk(Processed) > Rnk(Processed Next). The proof is similr to tht of Lemm 11. Lemm 14. Algorithm 4 eventully termintes. Proof. An nlogy of the proof of Lemm 10. Theorem 3 cn now be proved in very similr wy s Theorem 1.
Finite Automata. Informatics 2A: Lecture 3. John Longley. 25 September School of Informatics University of Edinburgh
Lnguges nd Automt Finite Automt Informtics 2A: Lecture 3 John Longley School of Informtics University of Edinburgh jrl@inf.ed.c.uk 25 September 2015 1 / 30 Lnguges nd Automt 1 Lnguges nd Automt Wht is
More informationRegular Sets and Expressions
Regulr Sets nd Expressions Finite utomt re importnt in science, mthemtics, nd engineering. Engineers like them ecuse they re super models for circuits (And, since the dvent of VLSI systems sometimes finite
More informationPolynomial Functions. Polynomial functions in one variable can be written in expanded form as ( )
Polynomil Functions Polynomil functions in one vrible cn be written in expnded form s n n 1 n 2 2 f x = x + x + x + + x + x+ n n 1 n 2 2 1 0 Exmples of polynomils in expnded form re nd 3 8 7 4 = 5 4 +
More informationSolutions to Section 1
Solutions to Section Exercise. Show tht nd. This follows from the fct tht mx{, } nd mx{, } Exercise. Show tht = { if 0 if < 0 Tht is, the bsolute vlue function is piecewise defined function. Grph this
More informationLINEAR TRANSFORMATIONS AND THEIR REPRESENTING MATRICES
LINEAR TRANSFORMATIONS AND THEIR REPRESENTING MATRICES DAVID WEBB CONTENTS Liner trnsformtions 2 The representing mtrix of liner trnsformtion 3 3 An ppliction: reflections in the plne 6 4 The lgebr of
More information1. The leves re either lbeled with sentences in ;, or with sentences of the form All X re X. 2. The interior leves hve two children drwn bove them) if
Q520 Notes on Nturl Logic Lrry Moss We hve seen exmples of wht re trditionlly clled syllogisms lredy: All men re mortl. Socrtes is mn. Socrtes is mortl. The ide gin is tht the sentences bove the line should
More informationHomework 3 Solutions
CS 341: Foundtions of Computer Science II Prof. Mrvin Nkym Homework 3 Solutions 1. Give NFAs with the specified numer of sttes recognizing ech of the following lnguges. In ll cses, the lphet is Σ = {,1}.
More informationIn the following there are presented four different kinds of simulation games for a given Büchi automaton A = :
Simultion Gmes Motivtion There re t lest two distinct purposes for which it is useful to compute simultion reltionships etween the sttes of utomt. Firstly, with the use of simultion reltions it is possile
More informationQuadratic Equations. Math 99 N1 Chapter 8
Qudrtic Equtions Mth 99 N1 Chpter 8 1 Introduction A qudrtic eqution is n eqution where the unknown ppers rised to the second power t most. In other words, it looks for the vlues of x such tht second degree
More information3 Determinization of BüchiAutomata
3 Determiniztion of BüchiAutomt Mrkus Roggenbch Bremen Institute for Sfe Systems Bremen University For Bene Introduction To determinize Büchi utomt it is necessry to switch to nother clss of ωutomt,
More informationOne Minute To Learn Programming: Finite Automata
Gret Theoreticl Ides In Computer Science Steven Rudich CS 15251 Spring 2005 Lecture 9 Fe 8 2005 Crnegie Mellon University One Minute To Lern Progrmming: Finite Automt Let me tech you progrmming lnguge
More informationExample 27.1 Draw a Venn diagram to show the relationship between counting numbers, whole numbers, integers, and rational numbers.
2 Rtionl Numbers Integers such s 5 were importnt when solving the eqution x+5 = 0. In similr wy, frctions re importnt for solving equtions like 2x = 1. Wht bout equtions like 2x + 1 = 0? Equtions of this
More informationUnion, Intersection and Complement. Formal Foundations Computer Theory
Union, Intersection nd Complement FAs Union, Intersection nd Complement FAs Forml Foundtions Computer Theory Ferury 21, 2013 This hndout shows (y exmples) how to construct FAs for the union, intersection
More informationIn this section make precise the idea of a matrix inverse and develop a method to find the inverse of a given square matrix when it exists.
Mth 52 Sec S060/S0602 Notes Mtrices IV 5 Inverse Mtrices 5 Introduction In our erlier work on mtrix multipliction, we sw the ide of the inverse of mtrix Tht is, for squre mtrix A, there my exist mtrix
More informationExponentiation: Theorems, Proofs, Problems Pre/Calculus 11, Veritas Prep.
Exponentition: Theorems, Proofs, Problems Pre/Clculus, Verits Prep. Our Exponentition Theorems Theorem A: n+m = n m Theorem B: ( n ) m = nm Theorem C: (b) n = n b n ( ) n n Theorem D: = b b n Theorem E:
More informationHelicopter Theme and Variations
Helicopter Theme nd Vritions Or, Some Experimentl Designs Employing Pper Helicopters Some possible explntory vribles re: Who drops the helicopter The length of the rotor bldes The height from which the
More informationReasoning to Solve Equations and Inequalities
Lesson4 Resoning to Solve Equtions nd Inequlities In erlier work in this unit, you modeled situtions with severl vriles nd equtions. For exmple, suppose you were given usiness plns for concert showing
More information1 Numerical Solution to Quadratic Equations
cs42: introduction to numericl nlysis 09/4/0 Lecture 2: Introduction Prt II nd Solving Equtions Instructor: Professor Amos Ron Scribes: Yunpeng Li, Mrk Cowlishw Numericl Solution to Qudrtic Equtions Recll
More informationFactoring Polynomials
Fctoring Polynomils Some definitions (not necessrily ll for secondry school mthemtics): A polynomil is the sum of one or more terms, in which ech term consists of product of constnt nd one or more vribles
More information9.3. The Scalar Product. Introduction. Prerequisites. Learning Outcomes
The Sclr Product 9.3 Introduction There re two kinds of multipliction involving vectors. The first is known s the sclr product or dot product. This is soclled becuse when the sclr product of two vectors
More informationFormal Languages and Automata Exam
Forml Lnguges nd Automt Exm Fculty of Computers & Informtion Deprtment: Computer Science Grde: Third Course code: CSC 34 Totl Mrk: 8 Dte: 23//2 Time: 3 hours Answer the following questions: ) Consider
More informationSPECIAL PRODUCTS AND FACTORIZATION
MODULE  Specil Products nd Fctoriztion 4 SPECIAL PRODUCTS AND FACTORIZATION In n erlier lesson you hve lernt multipliction of lgebric epressions, prticulrly polynomils. In the study of lgebr, we come
More informationIntegration. 148 Chapter 7 Integration
48 Chpter 7 Integrtion 7 Integrtion t ech, by supposing tht during ech tenth of second the object is going t constnt speed Since the object initilly hs speed, we gin suppose it mintins this speed, but
More information9 CONTINUOUS DISTRIBUTIONS
9 CONTINUOUS DISTIBUTIONS A rndom vrible whose vlue my fll nywhere in rnge of vlues is continuous rndom vrible nd will be ssocited with some continuous distribution. Continuous distributions re to discrete
More information11. Fourier series. sin mx cos nx dx = 0 for any m, n, sin 2 mx dx = π.
. Fourier series Summry of the bsic ides The following is quick summry of the introductory tretment of Fourier series in MATH. We consider function f with period π, tht is, stisfying f(x + π) = f(x) for
More informationOperations with Polynomials
38 Chpter P Prerequisites P.4 Opertions with Polynomils Wht you should lern: Write polynomils in stndrd form nd identify the leding coefficients nd degrees of polynomils Add nd subtrct polynomils Multiply
More informationRegular Languages and Finite Automata
N Lecture Notes on Regulr Lnguges nd Finite Automt for Prt IA of the Computer Science Tripos Mrcelo Fiore Cmbridge University Computer Lbortory First Edition 1998. Revised 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003,
More informationSection 2.3. Motion Along a Curve. The Calculus of Functions of Several Variables
The Clculus of Functions of Severl Vribles Section 2.3 Motion Along Curve Velocity ccelertion Consider prticle moving in spce so tht its position t time t is given by x(t. We think of x(t s moving long
More informationMath 135 Circles and Completing the Square Examples
Mth 135 Circles nd Completing the Squre Exmples A perfect squre is number such tht = b 2 for some rel number b. Some exmples of perfect squres re 4 = 2 2, 16 = 4 2, 169 = 13 2. We wish to hve method for
More informationAll pay auctions with certain and uncertain prizes a comment
CENTER FOR RESEARC IN ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT CREAM Publiction No. 12015 All py uctions with certin nd uncertin prizes comment Christin Riis All py uctions with certin nd uncertin prizes comment Christin
More informationTreatment Spring Late Summer Fall 0.10 5.56 3.85 0.61 6.97 3.01 1.91 3.01 2.13 2.99 5.33 2.50 1.06 3.53 6.10 Mean = 1.33 Mean = 4.88 Mean = 3.
The nlysis of vrince (ANOVA) Although the ttest is one of the most commonly used sttisticl hypothesis tests, it hs limittions. The mjor limittion is tht the ttest cn be used to compre the mens of only
More informationChapter 6 Solving equations
Chpter 6 Solving equtions Defining n eqution 6.1 Up to now we hve looked minly t epressions. An epression is n incomplete sttement nd hs no equl sign. Now we wnt to look t equtions. An eqution hs n = sign
More informationGraphs on Logarithmic and Semilogarithmic Paper
0CH_PHClter_TMSETE_ 3//00 :3 PM Pge Grphs on Logrithmic nd Semilogrithmic Pper OBJECTIVES When ou hve completed this chpter, ou should be ble to: Mke grphs on logrithmic nd semilogrithmic pper. Grph empiricl
More informationAssuming all values are initially zero, what are the values of A and B after executing this Verilog code inside an always block? C=1; A <= C; B = C;
B26 Appendix B The Bsics of Logic Design Check Yourself ALU n [Arthritic Logic Unit or (rre) Arithmetic Logic Unit] A rndomnumer genertor supplied s stndrd with ll computer systems Stn KellyBootle,
More informationEQUATIONS OF LINES AND PLANES
EQUATIONS OF LINES AND PLANES MATH 195, SECTION 59 (VIPUL NAIK) Corresponding mteril in the ook: Section 12.5. Wht students should definitely get: Prmetric eqution of line given in pointdirection nd twopoint
More informationOn the Meaning of Regression Coefficients for Categorical and Continuous Variables: Model I and Model II; Effect Coding and Dummy Coding
Dt_nlysisclm On the Mening of Regression for tegoricl nd ontinuous Vribles: I nd II; Effect oding nd Dummy oding R Grdner Deprtment of Psychology This describes the simple cse where there is one ctegoricl
More informationTests for One Poisson Mean
Chpter 412 Tests for One Poisson Men Introduction The Poisson probbility lw gives the probbility distribution of the number of events occurring in specified intervl of time or spce. The Poisson distribution
More informationA new algorithm for generating Pythagorean triples
A new lgorithm for generting Pythgoren triples RH Dye 1 nd RWD Nicklls 2 The Mthemticl Gzette (1998); 82 (Mrch, No. 493), p. 86 91 (JSTOR rchive) http://www.nicklls.org/dick/ppers/mths/pythgtriples1998.pdf
More informationUnambiguous Recognizable Twodimensional Languages
Unmbiguous Recognizble Twodimensionl Lnguges Mrcell Anselmo, Dor Gimmrresi, Mri Mdoni, Antonio Restivo (Univ. of Slerno, Univ. Rom Tor Vergt, Univ. of Ctni, Univ. of Plermo) W2DL, My 26 REC fmily I REC
More informationAlgorithms Chapter 4 Recurrences
Algorithms Chpter 4 Recurrences Outline The substitution method The recursion tree method The mster method Instructor: Ching Chi Lin 林清池助理教授 chingchilin@gmilcom Deprtment of Computer Science nd Engineering
More information5.2. LINE INTEGRALS 265. Let us quickly review the kind of integrals we have studied so far before we introduce a new one.
5.2. LINE INTEGRALS 265 5.2 Line Integrls 5.2.1 Introduction Let us quickly review the kind of integrls we hve studied so fr before we introduce new one. 1. Definite integrl. Given continuous relvlued
More informationCurve Sketching. 96 Chapter 5 Curve Sketching
96 Chpter 5 Curve Sketching 5 Curve Sketching A B A B A Figure 51 Some locl mximum points (A) nd minimum points (B) If (x, f(x)) is point where f(x) reches locl mximum or minimum, nd if the derivtive of
More information4.11 Inner Product Spaces
314 CHAPTER 4 Vector Spces 9. A mtrix of the form 0 0 b c 0 d 0 0 e 0 f g 0 h 0 cnnot be invertible. 10. A mtrix of the form bc d e f ghi such tht e bd = 0 cnnot be invertible. 4.11 Inner Product Spces
More informationChapter 4: Dynamic Programming
Chpter 4: Dynmic Progrmming Objectives of this chpter: Overview of collection of clssicl solution methods for MDPs known s dynmic progrmming (DP) Show how DP cn be used to compute vlue functions, nd hence,
More informationUniform convergence and its consequences
Uniform convergence nd its consequences The following issue is centrl in mthemtics: On some domin D, we hve sequence of functions {f n }. This mens tht we relly hve n uncountble set of ordinry sequences,
More informationBabylonian Method of Computing the Square Root: Justifications Based on Fuzzy Techniques and on Computational Complexity
Bbylonin Method of Computing the Squre Root: Justifictions Bsed on Fuzzy Techniques nd on Computtionl Complexity Olg Koshelev Deprtment of Mthemtics Eduction University of Texs t El Pso 500 W. University
More informationMATLAB: Mfiles; Numerical Integration Last revised : March, 2003
MATLAB: Mfiles; Numericl Integrtion Lst revised : Mrch, 00 Introduction to Mfiles In this tutoril we lern the bsics of working with Mfiles in MATLAB, so clled becuse they must use.m for their filenme
More informationLearning Workflow Petri Nets
Lerning Workflow Petri Nets Jvier Esprz, Mrtin Leucker, nd Mximilin Schlund Technische Universität München, Boltzmnnstr. 3, 85748 Grching, Germny {esprz,leucker,schlund}@in.tum.de Abstrct. Workflow mining
More information4.0 5Minute Review: Rational Functions
mth 130 dy 4: working with limits 1 40 5Minute Review: Rtionl Functions DEFINITION A rtionl function 1 is function of the form y = r(x) = p(x) q(x), 1 Here the term rtionl mens rtio s in the rtio of two
More informationSolving BAMO Problems
Solving BAMO Problems Tom Dvis tomrdvis@erthlink.net http://www.geometer.org/mthcircles Februry 20, 2000 Abstrct Strtegies for solving problems in the BAMO contest (the By Are Mthemticl Olympid). Only
More informationLecture 3 Basic Probability and Statistics
Lecture 3 Bsic Probbility nd Sttistics The im of this lecture is to provide n extremely speedy introduction to the probbility nd sttistics which will be needed for the rest of this lecture course. The
More informationOr more simply put, when adding or subtracting quantities, their uncertainties add.
Propgtion of Uncertint through Mthemticl Opertions Since the untit of interest in n eperiment is rrel otined mesuring tht untit directl, we must understnd how error propgtes when mthemticl opertions re
More informationEconomics Letters 65 (1999) 9 15. macroeconomists. a b, Ruth A. Judson, Ann L. Owen. Received 11 December 1998; accepted 12 May 1999
Economics Letters 65 (1999) 9 15 Estimting dynmic pnel dt models: guide for q mcroeconomists b, * Ruth A. Judson, Ann L. Owen Federl Reserve Bord of Governors, 0th & C Sts., N.W. Wshington, D.C. 0551,
More informationDecision Rule Extraction from Trained Neural Networks Using Rough Sets
Decision Rule Extrction from Trined Neurl Networks Using Rough Sets Alin Lzr nd Ishwr K. Sethi Vision nd Neurl Networks Lbortory Deprtment of Computer Science Wyne Stte University Detroit, MI 48 ABSTRACT
More informationAlgebra Review. How well do you remember your algebra?
Algebr Review How well do you remember your lgebr? 1 The Order of Opertions Wht do we men when we write + 4? If we multiply we get 6 nd dding 4 gives 10. But, if we dd + 4 = 7 first, then multiply by then
More informationIntroduction to Mathematical Reasoning, Saylor 111
Frction versus rtionl number. Wht s the difference? It s not n esy question. In fct, the difference is somewht like the difference between set of words on one hnd nd sentence on the other. A symbol is
More information200506 Second Term MAT2060B 1. Supplementary Notes 3 Interchange of Differentiation and Integration
Source: http://www.mth.cuhk.edu.hk/~mt26/mt26b/notes/notes3.pdf 256 Second Term MAT26B 1 Supplementry Notes 3 Interchnge of Differentition nd Integrtion The theme of this course is bout vrious limiting
More informationAntiderivatives/Indefinite Integrals of Basic Functions
Antiderivtives/Indefinite Integrls of Bsic Functions Power Rule: x n+ x n n + + C, dx = ln x + C, if n if n = In prticulr, this mens tht dx = ln x + C x nd x 0 dx = dx = dx = x + C Integrl of Constnt:
More informationData replication in mobile computing
Technicl Report, My 2010 Dt repliction in mobile computing Bchelor s Thesis in Electricl Engineering Rodrigo Christovm Pmplon HALMSTAD UNIVERSITY, IDE SCHOOL OF INFORMATION SCIENCE, COMPUTER AND ELECTRICAL
More informationProtocol Analysis. 17654/17764 Analysis of Software Artifacts Kevin Bierhoff
Protocol Anlysis 17654/17764 Anlysis of Softwre Artifcts Kevin Bierhoff TkeAwys Protocols define temporl ordering of events Cn often be cptured with stte mchines Protocol nlysis needs to py ttention
More informationGeneralized Inverses: How to Invert a NonInvertible Matrix
Generlized Inverses: How to Invert NonInvertible Mtrix S. Swyer September 7, 2006 rev August 6, 2008. Introduction nd Definition. Let A be generl m n mtrix. Then nturl question is when we cn solve Ax
More informationand thus, they are similar. If k = 3 then the Jordan form of both matrices is
Homework ssignment 11 Section 7. pp. 24925 Exercise 1. Let N 1 nd N 2 be nilpotent mtrices over the field F. Prove tht N 1 nd N 2 re similr if nd only if they hve the sme miniml polynomil. Solution: If
More informationMathematics. Vectors. hsn.uk.net. Higher. Contents. Vectors 128 HSN23100
hsn.uk.net Higher Mthemtics UNIT 3 OUTCOME 1 Vectors Contents Vectors 18 1 Vectors nd Sclrs 18 Components 18 3 Mgnitude 130 4 Equl Vectors 131 5 Addition nd Subtrction of Vectors 13 6 Multipliction by
More informationEinstein. Mechanics. In Grade 10 we investigated kinematics, or movement described in terms of velocity, acceleration, displacement, and so on.
Cmbridge University Press 9780521683593  Study nd Mster Physicl Sciences Grde 11 Lerner s Book Krin Kelder More informtion MODULE 1 Einstein Mechnics motion force Glileo Newton decelerte moment of
More informationMechanics Cycle 1 Chapter 5. Chapter 5
Chpter 5 Contct orces: ree Body Digrms nd Idel Ropes Pushes nd Pulls in 1D, nd Newton s Second Lw Neglecting riction ree Body Digrms Tension Along Idel Ropes (i.e., Mssless Ropes) Newton s Third Lw Bodies
More informationMATH 150 HOMEWORK 4 SOLUTIONS
MATH 150 HOMEWORK 4 SOLUTIONS Section 1.8 Show tht the product of two of the numbers 65 1000 8 2001 + 3 177, 79 1212 9 2399 + 2 2001, nd 24 4493 5 8192 + 7 1777 is nonnegtive. Is your proof constructive
More informationSearching All Seeds of Strings with Hamming Distance using Finite Automata
Proceedings of the Interntionl MultiConference of Engineers nd Computer Scientists 2009 Vol I IMECS 2009, Mrch 1820, 2009, Hong Kong Serching All Seeds of Strings with Hmming Distnce using Finite Automt
More informationPROF. BOYAN KOSTADINOV NEW YORK CITY COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY, CUNY
MAT 0630 INTERNET RESOURCES, REVIEW OF CONCEPTS AND COMMON MISTAKES PROF. BOYAN KOSTADINOV NEW YORK CITY COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY, CUNY Contents 1. ACT Compss Prctice Tests 1 2. Common Mistkes 2 3. Distributive
More information4. Greed. Algorithm Design by Éva Tardos and Jon Kleinberg Slides by Kevin Wayne (modified by Neil Rhodes)
4 Greed Greed is good Greed is right Greed works Greed clrifies, cuts through, nd cptures the essence of the evolutionry spirit  Gordon Gecko (Michel Dougls) Algorithm Design by Év Trdos nd Jon Kleinberg
More informationSmall Business Networking
Why network is n essentil productivity tool for ny smll business Effective technology is essentil for smll businesses looking to increse the productivity of their people nd business. Introducing technology
More informationModular Generic Verification of LTL Properties for Aspects
Modulr Generic Verifiction of LTL Properties for Aspects Mx Goldmn Shmuel Ktz Computer Science Deprtment Technion Isrel Institute of Technology {mgoldmn, ktz}@cs.technion.c.il ABSTRACT Aspects re seprte
More informationSuffix Trees CMSC 423
Suffix Trees CMSC 423 Preprocessing Strings Over the next few lectures, we ll see severl methods for preprocessing string dt into dt structures tht mke mny questions (like serching) esy to nswer: Suffix
More informationIntegration by Substitution
Integrtion by Substitution Dr. Philippe B. Lvl Kennesw Stte University August, 8 Abstrct This hndout contins mteril on very importnt integrtion method clled integrtion by substitution. Substitution is
More informationMathematics Higher Level
Mthemtics Higher Level Higher Mthemtics Exmintion Section : The Exmintion Mthemtics Higher Level. Structure of the exmintion pper The Higher Mthemtics Exmintion is divided into two ppers s detiled below:
More informationUse Geometry Expressions to create a more complex locus of points. Find evidence for equivalence using Geometry Expressions.
Lerning Objectives Loci nd Conics Lesson 3: The Ellipse Level: Preclculus Time required: 120 minutes In this lesson, students will generlize their knowledge of the circle to the ellipse. The prmetric nd
More information10.5 Graphing Quadratic Functions
0.5 Grphing Qudrtic Functions Now tht we cn solve qudrtic equtions, we wnt to lern how to grph the function ssocited with the qudrtic eqution. We cll this the qudrtic function. Grphs of Qudrtic Functions
More informationVectors 2. 1. Recap of vectors
Vectors 2. Recp of vectors Vectors re directed line segments  they cn be represented in component form or by direction nd mgnitude. We cn use trigonometry nd Pythgors theorem to switch between the forms
More informationBasic Analysis of Autarky and Free Trade Models
Bsic Anlysis of Autrky nd Free Trde Models AUTARKY Autrky condition in prticulr commodity mrket refers to sitution in which country does not engge in ny trde in tht commodity with other countries. Consequently
More informationArc Length. P i 1 P i (1) L = lim. i=1
Arc Length Suppose tht curve C is defined by the eqution y = f(x), where f is continuous nd x b. We obtin polygonl pproximtion to C by dividing the intervl [, b] into n subintervls with endpoints x, x,...,x
More informationAnswer, Key Homework 8 David McIntyre 1
Answer, Key Homework 8 Dvid McIntyre 1 This printout should hve 17 questions, check tht it is complete. Multiplechoice questions my continue on the net column or pge: find ll choices before mking your
More informationOn decidability of LTL model checking for process rewrite systems
Act Informtic (2009) 46:1 28 DOI 10.1007/s0023600800823 ORIGINAL ARTICLE On decidbility of LTL model checking for process rewrite systems Lur Bozzelli Mojmír Křetínský Vojtěch Řehák Jn Strejček Received:
More informationLecture 5. Inner Product
Lecture 5 Inner Product Let us strt with the following problem. Given point P R nd line L R, how cn we find the point on the line closest to P? Answer: Drw line segment from P meeting the line in right
More informationSequences and Series
Centre for Eduction in Mthemtics nd Computing Euclid eworkshop # 5 Sequences nd Series c 014 UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO While the vst mjority of Euclid questions in this topic re use formule for rithmetic
More informationEcon 4721 Money and Banking Problem Set 2 Answer Key
Econ 472 Money nd Bnking Problem Set 2 Answer Key Problem (35 points) Consider n overlpping genertions model in which consumers live for two periods. The number of people born in ech genertion grows in
More informationSmall Business Networking
Why network is n essentil productivity tool for ny smll business Effective technology is essentil for smll businesses looking to increse the productivity of their people nd business. Introducing technology
More informationNotes for Thurs 8 Sept Calculus II Fall 2005 New York University Instructor: Tyler Neylon Scribe: Kelsey Williams
Notes for Thurs 8 Sept Clculus II Fll 00 New York University Instructor: Tyler Neylon Scribe: Kelsey Willims 8. Integrtion by Prts This section is primrily bout the formul u dv = uv v ( ) which is essentilly
More informationBinary Representation of Numbers Autar Kaw
Binry Representtion of Numbers Autr Kw After reding this chpter, you should be ble to: 1. convert bse rel number to its binry representtion,. convert binry number to n equivlent bse number. In everydy
More informationFUNCTIONS AND EQUATIONS. xεs. The simplest way to represent a set is by listing its members. We use the notation
FUNCTIONS AND EQUATIONS. SETS AND SUBSETS.. Definition of set. A set is ny collection of objects which re clled its elements. If x is n element of the set S, we sy tht x belongs to S nd write If y does
More informationMath Review 1. , where α (alpha) is a constant between 0 and 1, is one specific functional form for the general production function.
Mth Review Vribles, Constnts nd Functions A vrible is mthemticl bbrevition for concept For emple in economics, the vrible Y usully represents the level of output of firm or the GDP of n economy, while
More informationExperiment 6: Friction
Experiment 6: Friction In previous lbs we studied Newton s lws in n idel setting, tht is, one where friction nd ir resistnce were ignored. However, from our everydy experience with motion, we know tht
More informationDFA Operations. Complement, Product, Union, Intersection, Difference, Equivalence and Minimization of DFAs
DFA Opertions Complement, Product, nion, Intersection, Difference, Equivlence nd inimiztion of DFAs Wednesdy, Octoer 7, 2009 eding: ipser pp. 4546, toughton 3.11 3.12 C235 nguges nd Automt Deprtment of
More informationTheory of Forces. Forces and Motion
his eek extbook  Red Chpter 4, 5 Competent roblem Solver  Chpter 4 relb Computer Quiz ht s on the next Quiz? Check out smple quiz on web by hurs. ht you missed on first quiz Kinemtics  Everything
More informationThe Velocity Factor of an Insulated TwoWire Transmission Line
The Velocity Fctor of n Insulted TwoWire Trnsmission Line Problem Kirk T. McDonld Joseph Henry Lbortories, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 Mrch 7, 008 Estimte the velocity fctor F = v/c nd the
More informationNeighborhood Based Fast Graph Search in Large Networks
Neighborhood Bsed Fst Grph Serch in Lrge Networks Arijit Khn Dept. of Computer Science University of Cliforni Snt Brbr, CA 9306 rijitkhn@cs.ucsb.edu Ziyu Gun Dept. of Computer Science University of Cliforni
More informationNet Change and Displacement
mth 11, pplictions motion: velocity nd net chnge 1 Net Chnge nd Displcement We hve seen tht the definite integrl f (x) dx mesures the net re under the curve y f (x) on the intervl [, b] Any prt of the
More informationSection 54 Trigonometric Functions
5 Trigonometric Functions Section 5 Trigonometric Functions Definition of the Trigonometric Functions Clcultor Evlution of Trigonometric Functions Definition of the Trigonometric Functions Alternte Form
More informationSmall Business Networking
Why network is n essentil productivity tool for ny smll business Effective technology is essentil for smll businesses looking to increse the productivity of their people nd processes. Introducing technology
More informationSmall Business Networking
Why network is n essentil productivity tool for ny smll business Effective technology is essentil for smll businesses looking to increse the productivity of their people nd processes. Introducing technology
More informationBypassing Space Explosion in Regular Expression Matching for Network Intrusion Detection and Prevention Systems
Bypssing Spce Explosion in Regulr Expression Mtching for Network Intrusion Detection n Prevention Systems Jignesh Ptel, Alex Liu n Eric Torng Dept. of Computer Science n Engineering Michign Stte University
More informationSmall Business Networking
Why network is n essentil productivity tool for ny smll business Effective technology is essentil for smll businesses looking to increse the productivity of their people nd processes. Introducing technology
More information