Lights and Darks of the Star-Free Star



Similar documents
6.045: Automata, Computability, and Complexity Or, Great Ideas in Theoretical Computer Science Spring, Class 4 Nancy Lynch

INTRODUCTORY SET THEORY

CS103B Handout 17 Winter 2007 February 26, 2007 Languages and Regular Expressions

Automata on Infinite Words and Trees

C H A P T E R Regular Expressions regular expression

SOLUTIONS TO ASSIGNMENT 1 MATH 576

Automata and Formal Languages

INCIDENCE-BETWEENNESS GEOMETRY

Formal Languages and Automata Theory - Regular Expressions and Finite Automata -

Notes from February 11

Fundamentele Informatica II

Continued Fractions and the Euclidean Algorithm

it is easy to see that α = a

Mathematics for Computer Science/Software Engineering. Notes for the course MSM1F3 Dr. R. A. Wilson

Lecture 1. Basic Concepts of Set Theory, Functions and Relations

Omega Automata: Minimization and Learning 1

Local periods and binary partial words: An algorithm

CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS

How To Prove The Dirichlet Unit Theorem

GENERATING SETS KEITH CONRAD

(LMCS, p. 317) V.1. First Order Logic. This is the most powerful, most expressive logic that we will examine.

Left-Handed Completeness

MA651 Topology. Lecture 6. Separation Axioms.

1. Prove that the empty set is a subset of every set.

Monitoring Metric First-order Temporal Properties

Introduction to Theory of Computation

CH3 Boolean Algebra (cont d)

! " # The Logic of Descriptions. Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation. Terminology. Overview. Three Basic Features. Some History on DLs

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 22

Degree Hypergroupoids Associated with Hypergraphs

Regular Languages and Finite Automata

Some Special Artex Spaces Over Bi-monoids

1 = (a 0 + b 0 α) (a m 1 + b m 1 α) 2. for certain elements a 0,..., a m 1, b 0,..., b m 1 of F. Multiplying out, we obtain

Grammars with Regulated Rewriting

The Halting Problem is Undecidable

Boolean Algebra Part 1

CMPSCI 250: Introduction to Computation. Lecture #19: Regular Expressions and Their Languages David Mix Barrington 11 April 2013

Gröbner Bases and their Applications

Reading 13 : Finite State Automata and Regular Expressions

Scanner. tokens scanner parser IR. source code. errors

On the generation of elliptic curves with 16 rational torsion points by Pythagorean triples

CS5236 Advanced Automata Theory

Incenter Circumcenter

Non-deterministic Semantics and the Undecidability of Boolean BI

Tree-representation of set families and applications to combinatorial decompositions

Deterministic Finite Automata

MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION. Mathematical Induction. This is a powerful method to prove properties of positive integers.

Chapter 6: Episode discovery process

Lecture 17 : Equivalence and Order Relations DRAFT

Chapter 4, Arithmetic in F [x] Polynomial arithmetic and the division algorithm.

26 Ideals and Quotient Rings

How To Compare A Markov Algorithm To A Turing Machine

Chapter 13: Basic ring theory

Logic, Algebra and Truth Degrees Siena. A characterization of rst order rational Pavelka's logic

Point Set Topology. A. Topological Spaces and Continuous Maps

Class One: Degree Sequences


THEORY of COMPUTATION

LAKE ELSINORE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

CODING TRUE ARITHMETIC IN THE MEDVEDEV AND MUCHNIK DEGREES

Properties of Real Numbers

Follow links for Class Use and other Permissions. For more information send to:

Matrix Algebra. Some Basic Matrix Laws. Before reading the text or the following notes glance at the following list of basic matrix algebra laws.

k, then n = p2α 1 1 pα k

CS154. Turing Machines. Turing Machine. Turing Machines versus DFAs FINITE STATE CONTROL AI N P U T INFINITE TAPE. read write move.

A Propositional Dynamic Logic for CCS Programs

Answer Key for California State Standards: Algebra I

3. Let A and B be two n n orthogonal matrices. Then prove that AB and BA are both orthogonal matrices. Prove a similar result for unitary matrices.

This asserts two sets are equal iff they have the same elements, that is, a set is determined by its elements.

THREE DIMENSIONAL GEOMETRY

ON DEGREES IN THE HASSE DIAGRAM OF THE STRONG BRUHAT ORDER

Metric Spaces. Chapter 1

Stationary random graphs on Z with prescribed iid degrees and finite mean connections

Reducing Clocks in Timed Automata while Preserving Bisimulation

s-convexity, model sets and their relation

First-Order Logics and Truth Degrees

A Beginner s Guide to Modern Set Theory

(IALC, Chapters 8 and 9) Introduction to Turing s life, Turing machines, universal machines, unsolvable problems.

Automata and Computability. Solutions to Exercises

Automata Theory. Şubat 2006 Tuğrul Yılmaz Ankara Üniversitesi

ON TORI TRIANGULATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH TWO-DIMENSIONAL CONTINUED FRACTIONS OF CUBIC IRRATIONALITIES.


A first step towards modeling semistructured data in hybrid multimodal logic

each college c i C has a capacity q i - the maximum number of students it will admit

Extension of measure

Understanding Basic Calculus

Database Design and Normal Forms

Regular Languages and Finite State Machines

(a) Write each of p and q as a polynomial in x with coefficients in Z[y, z]. deg(p) = 7 deg(q) = 9

POLYNOMIAL RINGS AND UNIQUE FACTORIZATION DOMAINS

Transcription:

Lights and Darks of the Star-Free Star Edward Ochmański & Krystyna Stawikowska Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń, Poland

Introduction: star may destroy recognizability In (finitely generated) trace monoids we have: singletons are in REC REC is closed under union REC is closed under catenation REC is included in RAT Corollary: If a rational language is not recognizable, recognizability was broken by a star operation.

History: questions on recognizable star Rational expressions are often more convenient (e.g. for inductive proofs) than the automata-oriented or algebraic descriptions of recognizable languages Definition: Recognizable star is the classical star, working only if its result is recognizable (and undefined otherwise) Questions: Does recognizable star produce (jointly with union and catenation) the whole class REC?

History: recognizable stars in free and trace monoids Questions: Does recognizable star produce (jointly with union and catenation) the whole class REC? Answer 1 (Kleene): In finitely generated free monoid YES. Any star keeps recognizability! Answer 2: In arbitrary trace monoid YES. The connected star keeps recognizability and builds the whole REC.

Monoids, languages, free monoids Monoid (M, ) a set M with an associative operation (called product) and a neutral element ε (called unit). Language in (M, ) any subset of M. Atomic languages (atoms) empty language and singletons {m}, for m M. Free Monoid (A*, ) set of all finite words (including ε) over an alphabet A, with concatenation.

Operations on languages Set-theoretical operations: union X Y intersection X Y difference X \ Y complement X = M \ X Algebraic operations: product: X Y = { xy x X, y Y} power: X 0 = {ε}, X n+1 = XX n star: X* = U{X n n=0,1,...}

Rational and star-free languages Rational languages: languages built up from atoms with operations of union, product and star. Rational expressions: expressions describing such construction. RAT(M): the class of rational subsets of M. Star-free languages: languages built up from atoms with operations of union, product and complement. Star-free expressions: expressions describing such construction. SF(M): the class of star-free subsets of M.

Syntactic monoid, recognizable and aperiodic languages syntactic congruence L M M of a language L M: u L v iff ( x,y M) xuy L xvy L syntactic monoid of a language L M: A language L M is: quotient monoid M L =M/ L recognizable (REC) iff its syntactic monoid M L is finite; aperiodic (AP) iff its syntactic monoid M L is finite and. aperiodic, i.e. ( n)( x M L ) x n =x n+1.

Star-Free = Aperiodic (in A*) Theorem (Schützenberger 1965): In finitely generated free monoids SF(A*) = AP(A*) i.e. a language is star-free iff it is aperiodic Example: The language (aa)* has syntactic monoid: ε a ε ε a It is not aperiodic, a a ε as a n a n+1 for any n. By Schützenberger Theorem, (aa)* is not star-free.

Example: M={a,b}*, L=(ab)* The language (ab)* is star-free (ab)* = (b a aa bb ) Syntactic monoid of (ab)* ε a b ab ba 0 ε ε a b ab ba 0 a a 0 ab 0 a 0 b b ba 0 b 0 0 ab ab a 0 ab 0 0 ba ba 0 b 0 ba 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 2 = a 3 = 0 b 2 = b 3 = 0 (ab) 2 = (ab) 3 = ab (ba) 2 = (ba) 3 = ba ε 2 = ε 3 = ε 0 2 = 0 3 = 0 n = 2 Hence (ab)* is aperiodic

Operation of STAR-FREE STAR Star-free star operation: L = L* if L* is star-free undefined otherwise SFS-expression: a rational expression, built from atoms with symbols of union, product and star-free star SFS-language: a language built up from atoms with operations of union, product and star-free star

Question: SFS = SF? Inclusion holds in any monoid, since union, product and star-free star preserve star-freeness. Inclusion is not general; there are monoids in which it does not hold. Example: (Z,+) integers with addition SF = { X Z X or X is finite } SFS = { X Z X=Z or X is finite }

Star-free star in free monoids Theorem (O/S 2005): In finitely generated free monoids SFS = SF Inclusion holds in any monoid. The proof of is based on McNaughton/Yamada (1960) construction of regular expressions for automata and uses the Schützenberger Theorem.

Many-sided characterization of Star-Free Trace Languages SF(A*)=SFS(A*)

Traces and trace languages Concurrent alphabet pair (A,I), where A is a finite alphabet, I A A is a symmetric and irreflexive independence relation; complement of I, the relation D=A A I, is called dependency. Trace monoid M=A*/ I quotient of A* by the least congruence containing the relation {ab ba aib}. Traces members of trace monoids. Trace languages subset of trace monoids. Free monoid trace monoid with I=.

Lemma on closing product Flattening of a trace language: UT = { w A* [w] T } Closure of a word language: L = U[L] = { w A* [w] [L] } L is closed iff L=L Lemat: If K,L A* are closed and star-free, then KL is star-free.

Flat characterization of star-free trace languages SF(A*)=SFS(A*) Lemma on closing product Schützenberger Theorem T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*)

Many-sided characterization of Star-Free Trace Languages SF(A*)=SFS(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*)

Aperiodic characterization of star-free trace languages Theorem (Guaiana/Restivo/Salemi 1992): In any trace monoid, T is star-free iff T is aperiodic. Proof: T AP(A*/ I ) T SF(A*/ I ) UT AP(A*) UT SF(A*)

Many-sided characterization of Star-Free Trace Languages SF(A*/I)=AP(A*/I) SF(A*)=SFS(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*)

Logic for traces (Thomas 1989) (A,I) concurrent alphabet, w=a 1 a n A*. Model for the trace [w] A*/ I is the trace-graph V,E,λ where V={x 1 x n } vertices, E V V edges and λ:v A is s.t. ( i) λ(x i )=a i and x i Ex j iff i<j & a i Da j First order formula is build up from atomic formulas x=y, xey and λ(x)=a with logical connectives and quantifiers.

First order definability T(Ψ)={α A*/ I Ψ is satisfied in α} trace language defined by the sentence Ψ. Trace language T is first-order definable iff there is a first-order sentence Ψ s.t. T=T(Ψ). FO(A*/ I ) the class of first-order definable languages in the trace monoid A*/ I. Theorem (McNaughton/Papert 1971): In finitely generated free monoids SF(A*)=FO(A*)

Lexicographic representation (A,<,I) ordered concurrent alphabet Lexicographic representative of trace α A*/ I a word Lex(α) A*, lexicographically first in α. Lex(T) = { Lex(α) A* α α T } lexicographic representation of the trace language T. LEX = Lex (A*/ I ) lexicographic representation of the trace monoid. LEX = A* U{A*b(I a )*aa* aib a<b}, where I a ={c A aic}, hence LEX is star-free.

Flat and Lex characterizations of first-order trace languages Theorem (Ebinger/Muscholl 1993): For any trace language T, the following statements are equivalent: (1) T is first-order definable in A*/ I (2) UT is first-order definable in A* (3) Lex(T) is first-order definable in A*

Many-sided characterization of Star-Free Trace Languages SF(A*/I)=AP(A*/I) SF(A*)=SFS(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*) T FO(A*/I) ) iff UT FO(A*) iff Lex(T) FO(A*)

Logical characterization of star-free trace languages Theorem (Ebinger/Muschol 93, Diekert/Metivier 97): A trace language is star-free if and only if it is first-order definable Proof. T SF(A*/ I ) iff UT SF(A*) iff UT FO(A*) iff T FO(A*/ I )

Many-sided characterization of Star-Free Trace Languages SF(A*/I)=AP(A*/I) SF(A*/I)=FO(A*/I) SF(A*)=SFS(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*) T FO(A*/I) ) iff UT FO(A*) iff Lex(T) FO(A*)

Lexicographic characterization of star-free trace languages Theorem: A trace language is star-free in A*/ I if and only if its lexicographic representation is star-free in A* Proof. T SF(A*/ I ) iff T FO(A*/ I ) iff Lex(T) FO(A*) iff Lex(T) SF(A*)

Many-sided characterization of Star-Free Trace Languages SF(A*/I)=AP(A*/I) SF(A*/I)=FO(A*/I) SF(A*)=SFS(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*) T FO(A*/I) ) iff UT FO(A*) iff Lex(T) FO(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff Lex(T) SF(A*)

Star-free star in trace monoids Lemma 1: If L SFS(A*) and L LEX, then [L] SFS(A*/ I ) Proof. Structural induction on SFS-expressions. Lemma 2: If UT SFS(A*), then T SFS(A*/ I ) Theorem: In trace monoids SFS = SF Proof. T SF(A*/ I ) UT SF(A*) UT SFS(A*) T SFS(A*/ I ) T SF(A*/ I )

Many-sided characterization of Star-Free Trace Languages SF(A*/I)=AP(A*/I) SF(A*/I)=FO(A*/I) SF(A*)=SFS(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*) T FO(A*/I) ) iff UT FO(A*) iff Lex(T) FO(A*) SF(A*/I)=SFS(A*/I) T SF(A*/I) iff Lex(T) SF(A*)

Problems 1-3 Problem 1: To find syntactically formulated conditions for star-free star in trace monoids. Problem 2: In which monoids SFS=SF? Does it hold in concurrency monoids of Droste?

Decision Problems Theorem (Muscholl/Petersen 1996): The problem "Is T star-free?" is decidable for rational trace languages only in trace monoids with transitive independency. Problem 3 (star problem for s-f trace languages): Is the question Is T* star-free? decidable for: star-free trace languages? finite trace languages?

A part without logic SF(A*/I)=AP(A*/I) SF(A*/I)=FO(A*/I) SF(A*)=SFS(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*) T FO(A*/I) ) iff UT FO(A*) iff Lex(T) FO(A*) SF(A*/I)=SFS(A*/I) T SF(A*/I) iff Lex(T) SF(A*)

A part without logic SF(A*/I)=AP(A*/I) SF(A*/I)=FO(A*/I) SF(A*)=SFS(A*) T SF(A*/I) iff UT SF(A*) T FO(A*/I) ) iff UT FO(A*) iff Lex(T) FO(A*) SF(A*/I)=SFS(A*/I) T SF(A*/I) iff Lex(T) SF(A*)

Problem 4 avoiding logic Problem 4: To prove the non-logic part of To prove the non-logic part of the characterization without logic

LSF languages lexicographic product: X Y = XY if XY LEX else undefined lexicographic complement: X" = LEX X LSF = the class of word languages that are built from atoms with union, lexicographic product and lexicographic complement

Question: LSF = SF inside LEX? Lemma: If L LSF, then [L] SF(A*/ I ) Proof: By lemma on closing product. By definition: If L LSF, then L SF and L LEX Question: Does the converse hold?

Transitively oriented alphabets An ordered alphabet (A,<,I ) is transitively oriented iff < I is transitive. Lemma: If L SF and L LEX, then L LSF Proposition: LSF = {L A* L SF and L LEX} if (A,<,I ) is transitively oriented Problem 4a: Does the proposition hold for any ordered alphabet?

Example D: a c b LEX = (a*b*c)*a*b* = a*b*(ca*b*)* a* = LEX (LEX c LEX LEX b) b* = LEX (LEX c LEX a LEX) c* = LEX ((LEX LEX b) a LEX LEX b (LEX a LEX)) (a c)* = LEX (LEX b LEX bc LEX) a*b* = LEX LEX c LEX (ac)* = LEX (c LEX (LEX LEX b) a LEX cc LEX (LEX LEX b) aa LEX)

How is LSF in the Pentagon? Pentagon cannot be transitively oriented D: What about LSF in the pentagon? Does a* belong to LSF?

Publications Edward Ochmański, Krystyna Stawikowska: On Closures of Lexicographic Star-Free Languages, Proceedings of AFL 2005, pp.227-234, University of Szeged, 2005. Edward Ochmański, Krystyna Stawikowska: Star-Free Star and Trace Languages, Fundamenta Informaticae 72, pp. 323-331, IOS Press 2006. Krystyna Stawikowska, Edward Ochmański: On Star-Free Trace Languages and their Lexicographic Representations, Proceedings of LATA 2007, pp. 541-551, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain, 2007. Edward Ochmański, Krystyna Stawikowska: A Star Operation for Star-Free Trace Languages, Proceedings of DLT 2007, LNCS 4588, pp. 337-345, Springer 2007. Krystyna Stawikowska: Word Languages Inducing Recognizable and Star-Free Trace Languages, PhD Thesis (in Polish), Toruń-Warszawa, 2007.

the end