A. Salomaa. Formal Languages. ACM Monograph Series. Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
On the Complexity of Some Verification Problems in Process.. - Hofstede, Orlowska (1997) (Correct)
....S = 2 Even for these type of process control specifications, equivalence is undecidable. Theorem 3.6 The equivalence problem for restricted process control structures is undecidable. Proof: For context free grammars G 1 and G 2 to determine whether L(G 1 ) L(G 2 ) is undecidable (see e.g. [20]) Formally, a context free grammar G is a tuple hN; Sigma; Pi; Si, where N 17 is a finite set of nonterminal symbols, Sigma is a finite set of terminal symbols, S 2 N is the initial symbol and Pi is a set of production rules of the form A where A 2 N and 2 (N [ Sigma) A ....
A. Salomaa. Formal Languages. ACM Monograph Series. Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973.
An Introduction to Compilers - Vermeir (2000) (Correct)
....the next input symbol 4 . Theorem 6 A context free grammar G = V; Sigma; ffi; P; S) where S does not appear on the right hand side of any production, is LR(1) iff algorithm 7 succeeds. One may wonder about the relationship between LL(k) and LR(k) grammars and languages. It turns out (see e.g. [Sal73]) that every LR(k) k 0) language can be generated by an LR(1) grammar. On the other hand, there are context free languages, e.g. the inherently ambiguous language of section 3.1, page 37, that are not LR(1) In fact, it can be shown that all deterministic context free languages 5 are LR(1) ....
A. Salomaa. Formal languages. ACM Monograph Series. Academic Press, 1973. 177
Verification Problems in Conceptual Workflow Specifications - Hofstede, Orlowska.. (1996) (22 citations) (Correct)
....correspond to basic functionality in a workflow structure. For a formal definition of a trace refer to [HN93] Theorem 3.4 The equivalence problem for workflow structures is undecidable. Proof: For context free grammars G 1 and G 2 to determine whether L(G 1 ) L(G 2 ) is undecidable (see e.g. [Sal73]) Formally, a context free grammar G is a tuple hN; Sigma; Pi; Si, where N is a finite set of nonterminal symbols, Sigma is a finite set of terminal symbols, S 2 N is the initial symbol and Pi is a set of production rules of the form A where A 2 N and 2 (N [ Sigma) see e.g. ....
A. Salomaa. Formal Languages. ACM Monograph Series. Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973.
Verification Problems in Conceptual Workflow Specifications - Hofstede, Orlowska.. (1996) (22 citations) (Correct)
....correspond to basic functionality in a workflow structure. For a formal definition of a trace refer to [14] Theorem 3.4 The equivalence problem for workflow structures is undecidable. Proof: For context free grammars G 1 and G 2 to determine whether L(G 1 ) L(G 2 ) is undecidable (see e.g. [27]) Formally, a context free grammar G is a tuple hN; Sigma; Pi; Si, where N is a finite set of nonterminal symbols, Sigma is a finite set of terminal symbols, S 2 N is the initial symbol and Pi is a set of production rules of the form A where A 2 N and 2 (N [ Sigma) see e.g. ....
A. Salomaa. Formal Languages. ACM Monograph Series. Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973.
On the Complexity of Some Verification Problems in Process.. - Hofstede, Orlowska (Correct)
....= 2 Even for these type of process control specifications, equivalence is undecidable. Theorem 3.6 The equivalence problem for restricted process control structures is undecidable. Proof: For context free grammars G 1 and G 2 to determine whether L(G 1 ) L(G 2 ) is undecidable (see e.g. [Sal73]) Formally, a context free grammar G is a tuple hN; Sigma; Pi; Si, where N is a finite set of nonterminal symbols, Sigma is a finite set of terminal symbols, S 2 N is the initial symbol and Pi is a set of production rules of the form A where A 2 N and 2 (N [ Sigma) A ....
A. Salomaa. Formal Languages. ACM Monograph Series. Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973.
A Parsing Algorithm for Context-Sensitive Graph Grammars - Rekers, Schürr (1995) (13 citations) (Correct)
....graph grammars (for which the left and right hand sides of productions are arbitrary graphs) Graph grammarswithout any restrictions for their left and right hand sides are of type 0. It is well known that the membership problem is undecidable for type 0 languages in the general case [17]. production instance pi 0 may be executed after another production instance pi has been executed. Both cases restrict the order in which pi and pi 0 are executed, but the second one leaves the question open whether pi 0 will be executed or not. Definition 2.17 A production instance pi ....
A. Salomaa. Formal Languages. ACM Monograph Series. Academic Press, New York, 1973.
Defining and Parsing Visual Languages with Layered Graph Grammars - Rekers, Schürr (1997) (16 citations) (Correct)
....into two layers: a set of terminals and set of nonterminals. Graph grammars with arbitrary graphs on left and right hand sides of productions are able to generate type 0 languages. But it is well known that the membership problem is undecidable for type 0 languages in the general case [21]. Therefore, we have to impose additional restrictions onto graph grammars in order to be able to develop a graph parsing algorithm. This will be done by defining a kind of lexicographical order on graphs based on decomposition of label alphabets. Definition 3.8 The decomposition L V Phi LE = L ....
A. Salomaa. Formal Languages. ACM Monograph Series. Academic Press, New York, 1973.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC