Scribd
Upload
10 views

Recursive and Recursively Enumerable Languages

Toc

Uploaded by

kavinjothi18
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
10 views

Recursive and Recursively Enumerable Languages

Toc

Uploaded by

kavinjothi18
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 44

Recursive and Recursively

Enumerable Languages
Halt State
• The Turing machine's computation ends when it enters its
halt state. It is possible that a computation might never end
because the machine never enters the halt state. This is
analogous to an infinite loop in a computer program.
Recursive language
• A language ‘L’ is said to be recursive if there exists a Turing
Machine which will accept all the strings in ‘L’ and reject all the
strings not in ‘L’.
• The turing machine will halt every time and give an answer
(accepted or rejected) for each and every input.
Recursively Enumerable Language
• A language ‘L’ is said to be recursively enumerable language if
there exists a Turing Machine which will accept for all the input
strings which are in ‘L’.
• But may or may not halt for all input strings which are not in ‘L’
causing it to enter in loop.
Decidable Language
A language ‘L’ is decidable if it is a recursive language. All
decidable languages are recursive languages and vice-versa.

Partially Decidable Language


A language ‘L’ is partially decidable if ‘L’ is a recursively
enumerable language.
Undecidable language
• A language is undecidable if it is not decidable.
• An undecidable language may sometimes be partially decidable
but not decidable.
• If a language is not even partially decidable, then there exists no
Turing machine for that language.
Decidable Vs undecidable languages
Recursive language
Recursively Enumerable (RE) language
Representation
Note
Decidable Problem
• For a decidable language, for each input string, the TM halts
either at the accept or the reject state.
Example 1
• Find out whether the following problem is decidable or not −
• Is a number ‘m’ prime?

Solution
• Prime numbers = {2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, …………..}
• Divide the number ‘m’ by all the numbers between ‘2’ and ‘√m’
starting from ‘2’.
• If any of these numbers produce a remainder zero, then it goes
to the “Rejected state”, otherwise it goes to the “Accepted state”.
So, here the answer could be made by ‘Yes’ or ‘No’.
• Hence, it is a decidable problem.
Example 2
• Given a regular language L and string w, how can we check if w
∈ L?
Solution
• Take the DFA that accepts L and check if w is accepted
Language
• If a language L is decidable, then its complement L' is
also decidable.

• If a language is decidable, then there is an enumerator


for it.
Undecidable Languages
• For an undecidable language, there is no Turing Machine which
accepts the language and makes a decision for every input
string w (TM can make decision for some input string though).

• A decision problem P is called “undecidable” if the language L


of all yes instances to P is not decidable.

• Undecidable languages are not recursive languages, but


sometimes, they may be recursively enumerable languages.
Example
1. The halting problem of Turing machine

2. The Post correspondence problem


• The undecidability of the string is determined with the help of Post
Correspondence Problem (PCP)
Halting Problem

• Deals with two decision problems:


1. Accepts: Given a TM, T and a string w, is w ϵ L(T).

2. Halts: Given a TM, T and a string w, does T halt on input, w.

• Can be stated in two ways, for a given TM and string w


1. Does the TM accepts the string, w?

2. Whether TM halts by accepting / rejecting the string, w?


Halting Problem
• Given an arbitrary TM and arbitrary input for the machine, then
is it possible to determine whether the machine will ever halt on
given input? This is called halting problem.

• That means we are asking for a procedure which enable us to


solve the halting problem for every pair (machine & input). The
answer is “no”. That is halting problem is unsolvable.
Halting Problem is undecidable
• Input − A Turing machine and an input string w.
• Problem − Does the Turing machine finish computing of the
string w in a finite number of steps? The answer must be either yes
or no.
• Proof − At first, we will assume that such a Turing machine
exists to solve this problem and then we will show it is
contradicting itself. We will call this Turing machine as a
Halting machine that produces a ‘yes’ or ‘no’. If the halting
machine finishes in a finite amount of time, the output comes as
‘yes’, otherwise as ‘no’.
Cont..,
• The block diagram of a Halting machine −
Cont..,
• Now we will design an inverted halting machine (HM)’ as −
• If H returns YES, then loop forever.
• If H returns NO, then halt.
• The block diagram of an ‘Inverted halting machine’ −
Cont..,
• Further, a machine (HM)2 in which input itself is constructed as
follows −
• If (HM)2 halts on input, loop forever.
• Else, halt.
• Here, we have got a contradiction. Hence, the halting problem is
undecidable.
Post Correspondence Problem (PCP)
• Devised by Emli Post
• An abstract problem which involves string rather than TMs.
• Tool for proving problems in logic or in formal language theory
to be undecidable.
Post correspondence problem
➢ It was introduced by Emil Leon post in 1946.
➢ It is undecidable.
➢ It is simpler than Halting problem.
➢ The aim is to arrange tiles in such order that string made by
numerators is same as string made by denominators.
➢ Post correspondence problem can be represented in two ways
1.Domino’s form
2.Table form
1.DOMINO’S FORM

2.TABLE FORM
Let us consider the following example:

• Step-1: We will start with tile in which numerator


and denominator are starting with same number,
so we can start with either 1 or 2. Lets go
with second tile, string made by numerator-
10111, string made by denominator is 10.
• Step-2: We need 1s in denominator to match 1s in
numerator so we will go with first tile, string made
by numerator is 10111 1, string made by
denominator is 10 111.
• Step-3: There is extra 1 in numerator to match this
1 we will add first tile in sequence, string made by
numerator is now 10111 1 1, string made by
denominator is 10 111 111.
• Step-4: Now there is extra 1 in denominator to
match it we will add third tile, string made by
numerator is 10111 1 1 10, string made by
denominator is 10 111 111 0

Final Solution - 2 1 1 3 String made by numerators: 101111110 String made by denominators: 101111110
• Example-2:
• Step-1: We will start from tile 1 as it is our only option, string made by numerator
is 100, string made by denominator is 1.
• Step-2: We have extra 00 in numerator, to balance this only way is to add tile 3 to
sequence, string made by numerator is 100 1, string made by denominator is 1
00.
• Step-3: There is extra 1 in numerator to balance we can either add tile 1 or tile 2.
Lets try adding tile 1 first, string made by numerator is 100 1 100, string made by
denominator is 1 00 1.
• Step-4: There is extra 100 in numerator, to balance this we can add 1st tile again,
string made by numerator is 100 1 100 100, string made by denominator is 1 00 1
1 1. The 6th digit in numerator string is 0 which is different from 6th digit in string
made by denominator which is 1.
• We can try unlimited combinations like one above but none of combination will
lead us to solution, thus this problem does not have solution.
Undecidability of Post Correspondence Problem : As theorem says
that PCP is undecidable. That is, there is no particular algorithm
that determines whether any Post Correspondence System has
solution or not

You might also like