NFA to DFA conversion = deterministic? - theory

I am struggling a bit with the meaning of determinism and nondeterminism. I get the difference when it comes to automata, but I can't seem to find an answer for the following: Is a NFA to DFA transformation deterministic?
If multiple DFAs can be constructed for the same regular language, does that mean that the result of a NFA to DFA transformation is not unique? And thus a nondeterministic algorithm?
I'm happy with any information you guys might be able to provide.
Thanks in advance!

There are two different concepts at play here. First, you are correct that there can be many different DFAs equivalent to the same NFA, just as there can be many NFAs that are all equivalent to one another.
Independently, there are several algorithms for converting an NFA into a DFA. The standard algorithm taught in most introductory classes on formal languages is the subset construction (also called the powerset construction). That algorithm is deterministic - there's a specific sequence of steps to follow to convert an NFA to a DFA, and accordingly you'll always get back the same DFA whenever you feed in the same NFA. You could conceivably have a nondeterministic algorithm for converting an NFA to a DFA, where the algorithm might produce one of many different DFAs as output, but to the best of my knowledge there aren't any famous algorithms of this sort.
Hope this helps!

DFA- means deterministic finite automata
Where as NFA- means non deterministic finite automata..
In dfa for every state there is a transition for both the inputs... I we have...{a, b} are the inputs for the given question.. For.. Every state there is a transition for both a and b... That automata is known as deterministic finite automata..
Where as in NDA we need not to have both input transitions for every state... At least one transition... is sufficient...
In NFA Epsilon transition is also accepted.. And dead state is also accepted...
In nfa... No of states required is less.. When compare to dfa.. Every dfa is equivalent to nfa... But every dfa is not equivalent to nfa...

Related

How to design a DFA that accepts basic arithmetic expressions

For my university task I must design a Deterministic Finite Automata which recognises basic arithmetic. We're basically building a very basic lexical analyzer.
The DFA uses the operators "+,-,*,/".
The DFA has only positive numbers so expressions like "-1+1","+1+1" aren't accepted.
It can accept decimals but only when they start with 0. so "0.3415" is accepted while "1.3415" is not.
Finally it can accept just a "0" by itself.
I'm confused about the best way to approach this. I have a basic foundation of DFAs and NFAs so can someone please just give me some hints as to how I should start?
My current approach is to draw some small DFAs. One for decimal numbers, one for whole numbers, one for operators, and one that's just a 0. Then I want to concatenate them and do the union of the smaller DFAs to create one big NFA and end it by converting back to a DFA.

Construct a Deterministic Finite Automata (DFA) for the language 1*01 (11)*(0 U 1)*,

Construct a Deterministic Finite Automata (DFA) for the language where the set of all strings are of the form 1*01 (11)*(0 U 1)*, that contain 01 as a substring
Without providing the direct answer, you should know the building blocks to be able to arrive there. Given that you know how finite automata work (otherwise read 'Languages and Machines' by Sudkamp), the DFA has a transitation for every symbol in every state:
Unlike for non-deterministic finite automata or NFA that we encounter in the next section, for a DFA in each state q ∈ Q and for every symbol a ∈ Σ the next state,
which is the state δ(q, a), is determined by the transition function δ. 1
Note: if you are a visual thinker and you wonder how the diagrams in these books are constructed, here is an example visualisation.

For each of the following regex, draw a DFA recognizing the corresponding language

I want to draw a DFA for each of the following regex.
The first one is that
(0|1)*110*
The second one is that
(1|110)*0
I wrote lots of diagrams, but I can't draw deterministic finite automata.
how can I get these?

Is there an algorithm to go from a Context-sensitive grammar to a linear bounded automata?

I am studying LBA (linear bounded automata). Trying to figure it out how to solve some exersise.
So I wonder if there is an easy way to make a LBA given a Context-sensitive grammar.
This is thinking like how you can go from LR grammar to DFA (deterministic finite automata).
thanks in advance
Since context sensitive grammars don't have any contractive production rules, you can just use exhaustive search.
Starting with a string, you can non-deterministically select a production to undo. This cannot increase the length of the input. Repeat until you either reach the empty string (in which case you accept) or cannot undo any production (in which case you reject).
This is a sketch, but filling in the details is straightforward.

NFA to DFA conversion whose language is the complement of L(A)

Can someone please help me with this question?
Describe an algorithm that converts an NFA into a DFA whose language is the complement of L(A). The complement should be taken with respect to the alphabet of A. Given an informal argument for why your construction works. You need not give a formal proof.
Any kind of guidance is appreciated...
You can convert a FA to its complement by turning its accept states into non-accept states, and turning its non-accept states into accept states. Easy!
You can convert a NFA to a DFA by considering that any NFA state is a power of the states: that is, for each state in the NFA, it is either active or not active. You can map each of these states to a state in a DFA, so you end up with at most 2|Q| states for your DFA which represents your NFA.
Edit: this algorithm and its proof do not actually need the details of A, so long as it is a valid Finite State Automaton.

Resources