
- Automata Theory - Applications
- Automata Terminology
- Basics of String in Automata
- Set Theory for Automata
- Finite Sets and Infinite Sets
- Algebraic Operations on Sets
- Relations Sets in Automata Theory
- Graph and Tree in Automata Theory
- Transition Table in Automata
- What is Queue Automata?
- Compound Finite Automata
- Complementation Process in DFA
- Closure Properties in Automata
- Concatenation Process in DFA
- Language and Grammars
- Language and Grammar
- Grammars in Theory of Computation
- Language Generated by a Grammar
- Chomsky Classification of Grammars
- Context-Sensitive Languages
- Finite Automata
- What is Finite Automata?
- Finite Automata Types
- Applications of Finite Automata
- Limitations of Finite Automata
- Two-way Deterministic Finite Automata
- Deterministic Finite Automaton (DFA)
- Non-deterministic Finite Automaton (NFA)
- NDFA to DFA Conversion
- Equivalence of NFA and DFA
- Dead State in Finite Automata
- Minimization of DFA
- Automata Moore Machine
- Automata Mealy Machine
- Moore vs Mealy Machines
- Moore to Mealy Machine
- Mealy to Moore Machine
- Myhill–Nerode Theorem
- Mealy Machine for 1’s Complement
- Finite Automata Exercises
- Complement of DFA
- Regular Expressions
- Regular Expression in Automata
- Regular Expression Identities
- Applications of Regular Expression
- Regular Expressions vs Regular Grammar
- Kleene Closure in Automata
- Arden’s Theorem in Automata
- Convert Regular Expression to Finite Automata
- Conversion of Regular Expression to DFA
- Equivalence of Two Finite Automata
- Equivalence of Two Regular Expressions
- Convert Regular Expression to Regular Grammar
- Convert Regular Grammar to Finite Automata
- Pumping Lemma in Theory of Computation
- Pumping Lemma for Regular Grammar
- Pumping Lemma for Regular Expression
- Pumping Lemma for Regular Languages
- Applications of Pumping Lemma
- Closure Properties of Regular Set
- Closure Properties of Regular Language
- Decision Problems for Regular Languages
- Decision Problems for Automata and Grammars
- Conversion of Epsilon-NFA to DFA
- Regular Sets in Theory of Computation
- Context-Free Grammars
- Context-Free Grammars (CFG)
- Derivation Tree
- Parse Tree
- Ambiguity in Context-Free Grammar
- CFG vs Regular Grammar
- Applications of Context-Free Grammar
- Left Recursion and Left Factoring
- Closure Properties of Context Free Languages
- Simplifying Context Free Grammars
- Removal of Useless Symbols in CFG
- Removal Unit Production in CFG
- Removal of Null Productions in CFG
- Linear Grammar
- Chomsky Normal Form (CNF)
- Greibach Normal Form (GNF)
- Pumping Lemma for Context-Free Grammars
- Decision Problems of CFG
- Pushdown Automata
- Pushdown Automata (PDA)
- Pushdown Automata Acceptance
- Deterministic Pushdown Automata
- Non-deterministic Pushdown Automata
- Construction of PDA from CFG
- CFG Equivalent to PDA Conversion
- Pushdown Automata Graphical Notation
- Pushdown Automata and Parsing
- Two-stack Pushdown Automata
- Turing Machines
- Basics of Turing Machine (TM)
- Representation of Turing Machine
- Examples of Turing Machine
- Turing Machine Accepted Languages
- Variations of Turing Machine
- Multi-tape Turing Machine
- Multi-head Turing Machine
- Multitrack Turing Machine
- Non-Deterministic Turing Machine
- Semi-Infinite Tape Turing Machine
- K-dimensional Turing Machine
- Enumerator Turing Machine
- Universal Turing Machine
- Restricted Turing Machine
- Convert Regular Expression to Turing Machine
- Two-stack PDA and Turing Machine
- Turing Machine as Integer Function
- Post–Turing Machine
- Turing Machine for Addition
- Turing Machine for Copying Data
- Turing Machine as Comparator
- Turing Machine for Multiplication
- Turing Machine for Subtraction
- Modifications to Standard Turing Machine
- Linear-Bounded Automata (LBA)
- Church's Thesis for Turing Machine
- Recursively Enumerable Language
- Computability & Undecidability
- Turing Language Decidability
- Undecidable Languages
- Turing Machine and Grammar
- Kuroda Normal Form
- Converting Grammar to Kuroda Normal Form
- Decidability
- Undecidability
- Reducibility
- Halting Problem
- Turing Machine Halting Problem
- Rice's Theorem in Theory of Computation
- Post’s Correspondence Problem (PCP)
- Types of Functions
- Recursive Functions
- Injective Functions
- Surjective Function
- Bijective Function
- Partial Recursive Function
- Total Recursive Function
- Primitive Recursive Function
- μ Recursive Function
- Ackermann’s Function
- Russell’s Paradox
- Gödel Numbering
- Recursive Enumerations
- Kleene's Theorem
- Kleene's Recursion Theorem
- Advanced Concepts
- Matrix Grammars
- Probabilistic Finite Automata
- Cellular Automata
- Reduction of CFG
- Reduction Theorem
- Regular expression to ∈-NFA
- Quotient Operation
- Parikh’s Theorem
- Ladner’s Theorem
Regular Sets
Any set that represents the value of the Regular Expression is called a Regular Set.
Properties of Regular Sets
Property 1. The union of two regular set is regular.
Proof −
Let us take two regular expressions
RE1 = a(aa)* and RE2 = (aa)*
So, L1 = {a, aaa, aaaaa,.....} (Strings of odd length excluding Null)
and L2 ={ ε, aa, aaaa, aaaaaa,.......} (Strings of even length including Null)
L1 ∪ L2 = { ε, a, aa, aaa, aaaa, aaaaa, aaaaaa,.......}
(Strings of all possible lengths including Null)
RE (L1 ∪ L2) = a* (which is a regular expression itself)
Hence, proved.
Property 2. The intersection of two regular set is regular.
Proof −
Let us take two regular expressions
RE1 = a(a*) and RE2 = (aa)*
So, L1 = { a,aa, aaa, aaaa, ....} (Strings of all possible lengths excluding Null)
L2 = { ε, aa, aaaa, aaaaaa,.......} (Strings of even length including Null)
L1 ∩ L2 = { aa, aaaa, aaaaaa,.......} (Strings of even length excluding Null)
RE (L1 ∩ L2) = aa(aa)* which is a regular expression itself.
Hence, proved.
Property 3. The complement of a regular set is regular.
Proof −
Let us take a regular expression −
RE = (aa)*
So, L = {ε, aa, aaaa, aaaaaa, .......} (Strings of even length including Null)
Complement of L is all the strings that is not in L.
So, L = {a, aaa, aaaaa, .....} (Strings of odd length excluding Null)
RE (L) = a(aa)* which is a regular expression itself.
Hence, proved.
Property 4. The difference of two regular set is regular.
Proof −
Let us take two regular expressions −
RE1 = a (a*) and RE2 = (aa)*
So, L1 = {a, aa, aaa, aaaa, ....} (Strings of all possible lengths excluding Null)
L2 = { ε, aa, aaaa, aaaaaa,.......} (Strings of even length including Null)
L1 L2 = {a, aaa, aaaaa, aaaaaaa, ....}
(Strings of all odd lengths excluding Null)
RE (L1 L2) = a (aa)* which is a regular expression.
Hence, proved.
Property 5. The reversal of a regular set is regular.
Proof −
We have to prove LR is also regular if L is a regular set.
Let, L = {01, 10, 11, 10}
RE (L) = 01 + 10 + 11 + 10
LR = {10, 01, 11, 01}
RE (LR) = 01 + 10 + 11 + 10 which is regular
Hence, proved.
Property 6. The closure of a regular set is regular.
Proof −
If L = {a, aaa, aaaaa, .......} (Strings of odd length excluding Null)
i.e., RE (L) = a (aa)*
L* = {a, aa, aaa, aaaa , aaaaa,} (Strings of all lengths excluding Null)
RE (L*) = a (a)*
Hence, proved.
Property 7. The concatenation of two regular sets is regular.
Proof −
Let RE1 = (0+1)*0 and RE2 = 01(0+1)*
Here, L1 = {0, 00, 10, 000, 010, ......} (Set of strings ending in 0)
and L2 = {01, 010,011,.....} (Set of strings beginning with 01)
Then, L1 L2 = {001,0010,0011,0001,00010,00011,1001,10010,.............}
Set of strings containing 001 as a substring which can be represented by an RE − (0 + 1)*001(0 + 1)*
Hence, proved.
Identities Related to Regular Expressions
Given R, P, L, Q as regular expressions, the following identities hold −
- ∅* = ε
- ε* = ε
- RR* = R*R
- R*R* = R*
- (R*)* = R*
- RR* = R*R
- (PQ)*P =P(QP)*
- (a+b)* = (a*b*)* = (a*+b*)* = (a+b*)* = a*(ba*)*
- R + ∅ = ∅ + R = R (The identity for union)
- R ε = ε R = R (The identity for concatenation)
- ∅ L = L ∅ = ∅ (The annihilator for concatenation)
- R + R = R (Idempotent law)
- L (M + N) = LM + LN (Left distributive law)
- (M + N) L = ML + NL (Right distributive law)
- ε + RR* = ε + R*R = R*