November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 1Diagonalization Another example: Let TOT be the set of all numbers p such.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
October 13, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 11: A Universal Program III 1 Coding Programs by Numbers Gödel numbers are usually very large, even for small.
Advertisements

Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 5 SEQUENCES, MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION, AND RECURSION SEQUENCES, MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION, AND RECURSION.
Induction and recursion
Decidable A problem P is decidable if it can be solved by a Turing machine T that always halt. (We say that P has an effective algorithm.) Note that the.
Prof. Busch - LSU1 Decidable Languages. Prof. Busch - LSU2 Recall that: A language is Turing-Acceptable if there is a Turing machine that accepts Also.
Courtesy Costas Busch - RPI1 A Universal Turing Machine.
1 Linear Bounded Automata LBAs. 2 Linear Bounded Automata are like Turing Machines with a restriction: The working space of the tape is the space of the.
Fall 2004COMP 3351 Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages.
1 Undecidability Andreas Klappenecker [based on slides by Prof. Welch]
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages
1 Uncountable Sets continued Theorem: Let be an infinite countable set. The powerset of is uncountable.
CHAPTER 4 Decidability Contents Decidable Languages
December 8, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 22: Turing Machines IV 1 Turing Machines Theorem 1.1: Any partial function that can be computed by a Post-
CS5371 Theory of Computation Lecture 1: Mathematics Review I (Basic Terminology)
October 8, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 10: A Universal Program II 1 Pairing Functions and Gödel Numbers This way the equation  x, y  = z defines.
Fall 2005Costas Busch - RPI1 Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages.
Fall 2004COMP 3351 A Universal Turing Machine. Fall 2004COMP 3352 Turing Machines are “hardwired” they execute only one program A limitation of Turing.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Lecture11: The Halting Problem Prof. Amos Israeli.
1 Reducibility. 2 Problem is reduced to problem If we can solve problem then we can solve problem.
November 3, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 14: A Universal Program VI 1 Recursively Enumerable Sets Definition: We write: W n = {x  N |  (x, n) 
Chapter 4: A Universal Program 1. Coding programs Example : For our programs P we have variables that are arranged in a certain order: Y 1 X 1 Z 1 X 2.
1 1 CDT314 FABER Formal Languages, Automata and Models of Computation Lecture 15-1 Mälardalen University 2012.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 7 FUNCTIONS.
A Universal Turing Machine
December 1, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 21: Turing Machines II 1 Simulation of L n in T We will now construct a Post-Turing program Q that simulates.
COMPSCI 102 Introduction to Discrete Mathematics.
1 Linear Bounded Automata LBAs. 2 Linear Bounded Automata (LBAs) are the same as Turing Machines with one difference: The input string tape space is the.
Cardinality with Applications to Computability Lecture 33 Section 7.5 Wed, Apr 12, 2006.
1 Turing’s Thesis. 2 Turing’s thesis: Any computation carried out by mechanical means can be performed by a Turing Machine (1930)
September 29, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 7: Primitive Recursive Functions III 1 Some Primitive Recursive Functions Example 3: h(x) = x! Here are.
Theory of Computation Lecture 5: Primitive Recursive Functions I
Lecture 21 Reducibility. Many-one reducibility For two sets A c Σ* and B c Γ*, A ≤ m B if there exists a Turing-computable function f: Σ* → Γ* such that.
November 12, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 17: Calculations on Strings II 1 Numerical Representation of Strings First, we define two primitive recursive.
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages
Equivalence Relations Lecture 45 Section 10.3 Fri, Apr 8, 2005.
December 3, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 21: Turing Machines III 1 Simulation of T in L Now the MIDDLE section of Q can be generated by replacing.
1 Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages.
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages. Definition: A language is recursively enumerable if some Turing machine accepts it.
Decidability.
1 A Universal Turing Machine. 2 Turing Machines are “hardwired” they execute only one program A limitation of Turing Machines: Real Computers are re-programmable.
The Acceptance Problem for TMs
A Universal Turing Machine
Another Word on PRC Classes
Theory of Computation Lecture 10: A Universal Program I
Recursively Enumerable and Recursive Languages
Theory Of Computer Science
Diagonalization and Reducibility
Theory of Computation Lecture 23: Turing Machines IV
Theory of Computation Lecture 14: A Universal Program V
Recursively Enumerable Sets
Numerical Representation of Strings
Theory of Computation Lecture 22: Turing Machines III
Busch Complexity Lectures: Undecidable Problems (unsolvable problems)
Decidable Languages Costas Busch - LSU.
Decidability and Undecidability
Theory Of Computer Science
The Programming Language L
Applied Discrete Mathematics Week 9: Integer Properties
Formal Languages, Automata and Models of Computation
Theory of Computation Lecture 21: Turing Machines II
Numerical Representation of Strings
Diagonalization and Reducibility
The Programming Language L
Numerical Representation of Strings
Theory of Computation Lecture 6: Primitive Recursive Functions I
Some Primitive Recursive Functions
Recursively Enumerable Sets
Theory of Computation Lecture 17: Calculations on Strings II
Theory of Computation Lecture 23: Turing Machines III
Recursion.
Presentation transcript:

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 1Diagonalization Another example: Let TOT be the set of all numbers p such that p is the number of a program that computes a total function f(x) of one variable: TOT = {z  N | (  x)  (x, z)  } Since  (x, z)   x  W z, TOT is simply the set of numbers z such that W z is the set of all nonnegative integers. Theorem 6.1: TOT is not recursively enumerable.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 2DiagonalizationProof: Suppose that TOT were r.e. Since TOT   (we know that there are total unary functions), by Theorem 4.9 there is a computable function g(x) such that TOT = {g(0), g(1), g(2), …}. Let h(x) =  (x, g(x)) + 1. Since any g(x) is the number of a program that computes a total function,  (x, g(x)) is defined for all x, and h(x) is a computable function. Let h(x) be computed by a program with number p. Then p  TOT, which means that p = g(i) for some i. Then h(i) =  (i, g(i)) + 1by definition of h =  (i, p) + 1since p = g(i) =  (i, p) + 1since p = g(i) = h(i) + 1since h is computed by p. Contradiction! = h(i) + 1since h is computed by p. Contradiction!

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 3Diagonalization The elements on the diagonal make it impossible for the function h to be computed by any of the programs g(x).  (0, g(0))  (1, g(0))  (2, g(0)) …  (0, g(1))  (1, g(1))  (2, g(1)) …  (0, g(2))  (1, g(2))  (2, g(2)) … ……… …

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 4Diagonalization Theorem 6.1 gives a reason why we base our studies of computability on partial rather than total functions: By Church’s Thesis, Theorem 6.1 shows that there is no algorithm to determine whether an L program computes a total function.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 5Reducibility Another important technique for determining nonrecursive sets is the reducibility method. Once some set (such as the set K) has been shown to be nonrecursive, we can use that set to give other examples of nonrecursive sets.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 6Reducibility Definition: Let A, B be sets. Then A is many-one reducible to B, written A  m B, if there is a computable function f such that A = {x  N | f(x)  B}. In other words, x  A if and only if f(x)  B. “Many-one” means that f does not have to be one-one. If A  m B, then testing membership in A is “no harder than” testing membership in B. To test whether x  A we can compute f(x) and then test whether f(x)  B.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 7Reducibility Theorem 6.2: Suppose A  m B. 1. If B is recursive, then A is recursive. 2. If B is r.e., then A is r.e. Proof: Let A = {x  N | f(x)  B}, where f is computable, and let P B (x) be the characteristic function of B. Then A = {x  N | P B (f(x))}. If B is recursive, then P B (f(x)), the characteristic function of A, is computable, so A is recursive. If B is r.e., then B = {x  N | g(x)  } for some partially computable function g. Then A = {x  N | g(f(x))  }, and since g(f(x)) is partially computable, A is r.e.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 8Reducibility We will often use Theorem 6.2 in the following form: If A is not recursive (r.e.), then B is not recursive (r.e.). Example: K 0 = {z  N |  r(z) (l(z))  } = {  x, y  |  y (x)  } Obviously, K 0 is r.e. However, we can show that K 0 is not recursive by reducing K to K 0. K = {n  N | n  W n }. Now x  K if and only if  x, x   K 0, and the function f(x) =  x, x  is computable. Therefore, K  m K 0, and K 0 is not recursive.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 9 Numerical Representation of Strings So far, our programs in the language L have been using natural numbers as their inputs and output. For many applications, however, we would prefer to perform computations on strings on some alphabet instead. You remember that we introduced a numbering of L programs so that L programs could be used as input and output of another (or the same) L program. With regard to strings, we will use the same approach: We will associate numbers with strings on A in a one-one manner.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 10 Numerical Representation of Strings We will use a system that is very similar to our everyday one-one mapping of natural numbers to strings of digits. There we have a set D of digits, and we define an order s 0, …, s 9 on these digits: D = {s 0, …, s 9 } = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}. There are n = 10 elements in our set of digits. Then any string w of digits can be written as w = s i k s i k-1 … s i 1 s i 0, where 0  i m  n - 1 and k = |w| - 1.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 11 Numerical Representation of Strings For example, if we have the string w = 372, then k = 2, i 2 = 3, i 1 = 7, i 0 = 2. To find the number associated with this string, we use exactly the following formula: x = i k  n k + i k-1  n k-1 + … + i 1  n 1 + i 0  n 0 x = 3   = 372. If w = 372 is an octal representation of an integer, then we would have n = 8 and therefore: x = 3   = = 250

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 12 Numerical Representation of Strings Now let us develop such a method for strings on an alphabet A. Remember that the set of all strings on an alphabet A, including the empty string, is called A*. Again, let us assume that there is a particular order of symbols in A. We write A = {s 1, …, s n } and define that the sequence s 1, …, s n corresponds to this order of symbols. Then any string w on A can be written as w = s i k s i k-1 … s i 1, s i 0, where 1  i m  n and k = |w| - 1. The empty string is indicated by w = 0.

November 10, 2009Theory of Computation Lecture 16: Computation on Strings I 13 Numerical Representation of Strings Then we use exactly the same formula as before to associate w with an integer x: x = i k  n k + i k-1  n k-1 + … + i 1  n 1 + i 0  n 0. With w = 0 we associate the number x = 0. For example, consider the alphabet A = {a, b, c} and the string w = caba. Then x = 3    = = 97. Now why is this representation unique? We can prove this by showing how to retrieve the subscripts i 0, i 1, …, i k from x for any x > 0.