Decidable::=`problems/languages where a halting TM can decide if a
string is accepted or rejected` -- there exists a TM which always halts
and it Halts in an F state if and only if its input was in the language, and
it halts in a non-F state if and only if its input is not in the language.
| Type of Problem | Machine | Accepts | Rejects | Runs for ever
|
|---|
| Regular | FSA | L | L_bar | Never
|
| Recursive | TM | L | L_bar | Never
|
| Decidable | TM | L | L_bar | Never
|
| Undecidable | ?
|
| RE | TM | L | ? | Perhaps
|
| not RE | None
|
Ch 9 pp 368 -- Enumeration of Binary Strings
Why does a non-RE language prove undecidable?
Ch 9 pp -- Where is Theorem 9.1
9.1.1 Enumerating the Binary Strings 369
Ch 9.1.1 pp 369 -- Enumerating Binary Strings
The book says "...we shall need to assign integers to all the binary
strings..." but they start counting with an empty symbol and not 0 or 1.
Why do they do this?
Ch 9.1.5 pp 372 -- Exercises for Section 9.1
Exerciee 9.1.1(a) asks what string w37 is. The online solution gives 37 in
binary (100101) and removes the leading 1 to get 00101 as the answer, but
doesn't explain why.
9.1.2 Codes for Turing Machines 369
9.1.3 The Diagonalization Language 370
L_d::={w[i] | for some i, w[i] is not in L(M[i])}
Ch 9.1.3 pp 371 -- Diagonalization Language
can you explain how the diagonal values tell whether TM accepts the code?
Ch 9.1.3 pp 370-371 -- Diagonalization language
I am a bit confused with this definition, could you go over how this 'diagonalization' language represents acceptance of strings during class?
Ch 9.1.3 pp 371 -- Figure 9.1 Diagonal
when it comes to the table that represent the diagonal on page 371 The book states that if fig 9.1 were the correct table, then the complemented diagonal would begin 1,0,0,0.....I was just wondering how they come up with this conclusion.It's a bit unclear to me.
Ch 9.1 pp 371 -- Diagonalization and Figure 9.1
Can you please go over Figure 9.1 and explain why the diagonal shows whether a string is accepted or not?
Ch 9.1.3 pp 370-372 -- Diagonalization Language
Could you go over the diagonalization language? I\'ve seen this proof multiple times, but I still have no idea how or why it works.
9.1.4 Proof that L_d is not Recursively Enumerable 372
Theorem 9.2
9.1.5 Exercises for Section 9.1 372