1 lecture 9 recursive and r.e. language classes –representing solvable and unsolvable problems...
Post on 19-Dec-2015
232 views
TRANSCRIPT
1
Lecture 9
• Recursive and r.e. language classes– representing solvable and unsolvable problems
• Proofs of closure properties – for the set of recursive (solvable) languages– for the set of r.e. (half-solvable) languages
• Generic element/template proof technique• Relationship between RE and REC
– pseudoclosure property
2
RE and REC language classes
• REC– A solvable language is commonly referred to as
a recursive language for historical reasons– REC is defined to be the set of solvable or
recursive languages
• RE– A half-solvable language is commonly referred
to as a recursively enumerable or r.e. language– RE is defined to be the set of r.e. or half-
solvable languages
3
Why study closure properties of RE and REC?
• It tests how well we really understand the concepts we encounter– language classes, REC, solvability, half-solvability
• It highlights the concept of subroutines and how we can build on previous algorithms to construct new algorithms– we don’t have to build our algorithms from scratch
every time
4
Example Application• Setting
– I have two programs which can solve the language recognition problems for L1 and L2
– I want a program which solves the language recognition problem for L1 intersect L2
• Question– Do I need to develop a new program from scratch
or can I use the existing programs to help?• Does this depend on which languages L1 and L2 I am
working with?
5
Closure Properties of REC
• We now prove REC is closed under two set operations– Set Complement– Set Intersection
• In these proofs, we try to highlight intuition and common sense
6
Quick Questions
• What does the following statement mean?– REC is closed under the set complement
operation
• How do you prove a language L is in REC?
7
Set Complement Example
• Even: the set of even length strings over {0,1}• Complement of Even?
– Odd: the set of odd length strings over {0,1}
• Is Odd recursive (solvable)?• How is the program P’ which solves Odd related
to the program P which solves Even?
8
Set Complement Lemma
• If L is a solvable language, then L complement is a solvable language– Rewrite this in first-order logic
• Proof– Let L be an arbitrary solvable language
• First line comes from For all L in REC
– Let P be the C++ program which solves L• P exists by definition of REC
9
– Modify P to form P’ as follows• Identical except at very end
• Complement answer – Yes -> No– No -> Yes
– Program P’ solves L complement• Halts on all inputs
• Answers correctly
– Thus L complement is solvable• Definition of solvable
proof continued
11
Code for P’
bool main(string y)
{
if (P (y)) return no; else return yes;
}
bool P (string y) /* details unknown */
12
Set Intersection Example
• Even: the set of even length strings over {0,1}• Mod-5: the set of strings of length a multiple of 5
over {0,1}• What is Even intersection Mod-5?
– Mod-10: the set of strings of length a multiple of 10 over {0,1}
• How is the program P3 (Mod-10) related to programs P1 (Even) and P2 (Mod-5)
13
Set Intersection Lemma
• If L1 and L2 are solvable languages, then L1 intersection L2 is a solvable language
– Rewrite this in first-order logic
– Note we have two languages because intersection is a binary operation
• Proof– Let L1 and L2 be arbitrary solvable languages
– Let P1 and P2 be programs which solve L1 and L2, respectively
14
– Construct program P3 from P1 and P2 as follows
• P3 runs both P1 and P2 on the input string
• If both say yes, P3 says yes
• Otherwise, P3 says no
– P3 solves L1 intersection L2 • Halts on all inputs
• Answers correctly
– L1 intersection L2 is a solvable language
proof continued
16
Code for P3
bool main(string y)
{
if (P1(y) && P2(y)) return yes;
else return no;
}
bool P1(string y) /* details unknown */
bool P2(string y) /* details unknown */
17
Other Closure Properties
• Unary Operations– Language Reversal– Kleene Star
• Binary Operations– Set Union– Set Difference– Symmetric Difference– Concatenation
18
Closure Properties of RE
• We now try to prove RE is closed under the same two set operations– Set Intersection – Set Complement
• In these proofs– We define a more formal proof methodology– We gain more intuition about the differences
between solvable and half-solvable problems
19
Quick Questions
• What does the following statement mean?– RE is closed under the set intersection
operation
• How do you prove a language L is in RE?
20
RE Closed Under Set Intersection
• First-order logic formulation?– For all L1, L2 in RE, L1 intersect L2 in RE
– For all L1, L2 ((L1 in RE) and (L2 in RE) --> ((L1 intersect L2) in RE)
• What this really means– Let Li denote the ith r.e. language
• L1 intersect L1 is in RE
• L1 intersect L2 is in RE
• ...
• L2 intersect L1 is in RE
• ...
21
Generic Element or Template Proofs
• Since there are an infinite number of facts to prove, we cannot prove them all individually
• Instead, we create a single proof that proves each fact simultaneously
• I like to call these proofs generic element or template proofs
22
Basic Proof Ideas• Name your generic objects
– In this case, we use L1 and L2
• Only use facts which apply to any relevant objects– We will only use the fact that there must exist P1 and
P2 which half-solve L1 and L2
• Work from both ends of the proof– The first and last lines are usually obvious, and we can
often work our way in
23
Set Intersection Example
• Let L1 and L2 be arbitrary r.e. languages
• L1 intersection L2 is an r.e. language
• There exist P1 and P2 s.t. Y(P1)=L1 and Y(P2)=L2
– By definition of half-solvable languages
• There exists a program P which half-solves L1 intersection L2
• Construct program P3 from P1 and P2
– Note, we can assume very little about P1 and P2
• Prove Program P3 half-solves L1 intersection L2
24
Constructing P3
• What did we do in the REC setting?
• Build P3 using P1 and P2 as subroutines
• We just have to be careful now in how we use P1 and P2
25
Constructing P3
• Run P1 and P2 in parallel
– One instruction of P1, then one instruction of P2, and so on
• If both halt and say yes, halt and say yes
• If both halt but both do not say yes, halt and say no– Note, if either never halts, P3 never halts
27
Code for P3
bool main(string y)
{
parallel-execute(P1(y), P2(y)) until both return;
if ((P1(y) && P2(y)) return yes;
else return no;
}
bool P1(string y) /* details unknown */
bool P2(string y) /* details unknown */
28
Proving P3 Is Correct
• 2 steps to showing P3 half-solves L1 intersection L2
– For all x in L1 intersection L2, must show P3 • accepts x
– halts and says yes
– For all x not in L1 intersection L2, must show P3 • rejects x or• loops on x or• crashes on x
29
Part 1 of Correctness Proof
• P3 accepts x in L1 intersection L2
– Let x be an arbitrary string in L1 intersection L2
• Note, this subproof is a generic element proof
– P1 accepts x
• L1 intersection L2 is a subset of L1
• P1 accepts all strings in L1
– P2 accepts x
– P3 accepts x• We reach the AND gate because of the 2 previous facts
• Since both P1 and P2 accept, AND evaluates to YES
30
Part 2 of Correctness Proof• P3 does not accept x not in L1 intersection L2
– Let x be an arbitrary string not in L1 intersection L2
– By definition of intersection, this means x is not in L1 or L2
– Case 1: x is not in L1 • 2 possibilities
• P1 rejects (or crashes on) x
– One input to AND gate is No– Output cannot be yes
– P3 does not accept x
• P1 loops on x
– One input never reaches AND gate– No output
– P3 loops on x
• P3 does not accept x when x is not in L1
– Case 2: x is not in L2
• Essentially identical analysis
– P3 does not accept x not in L1 intersection L2
31
RE closed under set complement?
• First-order logic formulation?– For all L in RE, L complement in RE– For all L (L in RE) --> ((L complement) in RE)
• What this really means– Let Li denote the ith r.e. language
• L1 complement is in RE
• L2 complement is in RE
• ...
32
Set complement proof overview
• Let L be an arbitrary r.e. language
• L complement is an r.e. language
• There exists P s.t. Y(P)=L– By definition of r.e. languages
• There exists a program P’ which half-solves L complement
• Construct program P’ from P– Note, we can assume very little about P
• Prove Program P’ half-solves L complement
33
Constructing P’• What did we do in recursive case?
– Run P and then just complement answer at end• Accept -> Reject• Reject -> Accept
• Does this work in this case?– No. Why not?
• Accept->Reject and Reject ->Accept ok• Problem is we need to turn Loop->Accept
– this requires solving the halting problem
34
What can we conclude?
• Previous argument only shows that the approach used for REC does not work for RE
• This does not prove that RE is not closed under set complement
• Later, we will prove that RE is not closed under set complement
35
Other closure properties
• Unary Operations– Language reversal– Kleene Closure
• Binary operations– union– concatenation
• Not closed– Set difference
36
Closure Property Applications
• How can we use closure properties to prove a language LT is r.e. or recursive?
• Unary operator op (e.g. complement)– 1) Find a known r.e. or recursive language L
– 2) Show LT = L op
• Binary operator op (e.g. intersection)– 1) Find 2 known r.e or recursive languages L1 and L2
– 2) Show LT = L1 op L2
37
Closure Property Applications
• How can we use closure properties to prove a language LT is not r.e. or recursive?
• Unary operator op (e.g. complement)– 1) Find a known not r.e. or non-recursive language L
– 2) Show LT op = L
• Binary operator op (e.g. intersection)– 1) Find a known r.e. or recursive language L1
– 2) Find a known not r.e. or non-recursive language L2
– 2) Show L2 = L1 op LT
38
Example
• Looping Problem– Input
• Program P
• Input x for program P
– Yes/No Question• Does P loop on x?
• Looping Problem is unsolvable– Looping Problem complement = H
39
Closure Property Applications
• Proving a new closure property
• Theorem: Unsolvable languages are closed under set complement– Let L be an arbitrary unsolvable language
– If Lc is solvable, then L is solvable• (Lc)c = L
• Solvable languages closed under complement
– However, we are assuming that L is unsolvable
– Therefore, we can conclude that Lc is unsolvable
– Thus, unsolvable languages are closed under complement
40
Pseudo Closure Property
• Lemma: If L and Lc are half-solvable, then L is solvable.
• First-order logic?– For all L in RE, (Lc in RE) --> (L in REC)
– For all L, ((L in RE) and (Lc in RE)) --> (L in REC)
• Question: What about Lc?– Also solvable because REC closed under set
complement
41
High Level Proof
– Let L be an arbitrary language where L and Lc are both half-solvable
– Let P1 and P2 be the programs which half-solve L and Lc, respectively
– Construct program P3 from P1 and P2
• Argue P3 solves L
– L is solvable
42
Constructing P3
• Problem– Both P1 and P2 may loop on some input strings,
and we need P3 to halt on all input strings
• Key Observation– On all input strings, one of P1 and P2 is
guaranteed to halt. Why?• Nature of complement operation
44
Construction and Proof
• P3’s Operation
– Run P1 and P2 in parallel on the input string x until one accepts x
• Guaranteed to occur given previous argument
• Also, only one program will accept any string x
– IF P1 is the accepting machine THEN yes ELSE no
46
Code for P3
bool main(string y)
{
parallel-execute(P1(y), P2(y)) until one returns yes;
if (P1(y)) return yes;
if (P2(Y)) return no;
}
bool P1(string y) /* details unknown */
bool P2(string y) /* details unknown */
47
Question
• What if P2 rejects the input?
• Our description of P3 doesn’t describe what we should do in this case.– If P2 rejects the input, then the input must be in
L
– This means P1 will eventually accept the input.
– This means P3 will eventually accept the input.