Theory of Computation : Lecture 4

Quick Recap:
- DFAs
- Nondeterminism
- NFA → DFA
- Closure under and
- Regular expressions → finite automata
- Finite automata → regular expressions

Today :
- Limitations of DFAs/NFAs ; Proving languages
aren’t regular
 Non-Regular Languages
How do we show a language is not regular?
- Remember, to show a language is regular, we give a DFA.
- To show a language is not regular, we must give a proof.
- It is not enough to say that you couldn’t find a DFA for it,
therefore the language isn’t regular.

Two examples: Here .

1. Let has equal numbers of 0s and 1s
Intuition: is not regular because DFAs cannot count unboundedly.
2. Let has equal numbers of 01 and 10 substrings
]
]

0101 0110
]

Intuition: is not regular because DFAs cannot count unboundedly.

However is regular! Sometimes intuition works, but it can also be wrong.
Moral: You need to give a proof.
 Example 1
Let

Let, if possible there is a finite automate that recognizes L

Suppose this automata has states (some finite number)
 Method for Proving Non-regularity
Pumping Lemma: For every regular language ,
there is a number (the “pumping length”) such that
if and then where
1) for all

}
2)
3) 𝑖
Informally: is regular → every long string in can be pumped and the result stays in .
Proof: Let DFA recognize . Let be the number of states in . Pick where .

𝑠=¿ 𝑥 𝑦 𝑧 𝑀 𝑦
𝑞𝑗 𝑞𝑗
𝑞𝑗 The path that follows
will repeat a state when reading 𝑥 𝑧 when reading .
because is so long.
𝑥 𝑦 𝑦 𝑧
𝑞𝑗 𝑞𝑗 𝑞 𝑗 is also accepted
 Method for Proving Non-regularity
Pumping Lemma: For every regular language , there is a
such that if and then where
1) for all
2)
3)

How to use this to prove non-regularity of a language A : the `Demon’ game

a) Imagine that a Demon claims A is regular , gives you some and claims the pumping lemma is
satisfied for this
b) You task : suitably choose an such that
c) Demon’s task : suggest some split in to that satisfies (2) and (3)
d) Your task : choose an to show that does not belong to A

Basically, you will need to show that you always emerge victorious !
 Example 1 of Proving Non-regularity
Pumping Lemma: For every regular language , there is a
such that if and then where
1) for all
2)
3)

Let
Show: is not regular
Proof by Contradiction: (or Demon game )
Assume (to get a contradiction) that is regular.
The Demon gives a that satisfies pumping lemma 𝑠=¿000 ⋯ 000111 ⋯ 111
You choose . 𝑥𝑦 𝑧
Now Demon gives split satisfying the (2) and (3) conditions. ≤𝑝
Here is your trump card : Due to condition (3), is always an all-zero string !
Hence you choose
But has excess 0s and thus , hence beating the Demon.
 Example 2 of Proving Non-regularity
Pumping Lemma: For every regular language , there is a
such that if and then where
1) for all
2)
3)

Let Say .
Proof by Contradiction:
𝑠=¿000 ⋯ 000000 ⋯ 000
The Demon gives as above. Need to choose . Which ?
𝑥𝑦 𝑧
≤𝑝 𝑦 =00
Suppose you pick .
Now the Demon gives you the following split
And now you are screwed. No matter what you choose, stays in the language A.
(This is also sometimes referred to as - can be pumped
Should we give up then ?
 Example 2 of Proving Non-regularity
Pumping Lemma: For every regular language , there is a
such that if and then where
1) for all
2)
3)

Let Say .
Show: is not regular
Proof by Contradiction:
Give .
Now no matter how the Demon chooses the split , by condition (3), will contain
only .
𝑠=¿000 ⋯ 001000 ⋯ 001
𝑥𝑦 𝑧
So again choose and you win since ≤𝑝
 Example 3 of Proving Non-regularity
Pumping Lemma: For every regular language , there is a
such that if and then where
1) for all
2)
3)
Let
Show: is not regular 𝑠=¿𝑎𝑎𝑎 ⋯ 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 ⋯ 𝑎𝑎𝑎
Proof by Contradiction: 𝑥𝑦 𝑧
≤𝑝
Demon gives you
Pick .
Now no matter how the Demon chooses the split , by condition (3), will contain at most .
You choose . The string contains many which is strictly less than
Further, by condition (2), and hence number of in is strictly between !
 Example 4 of Proving Non-regularity

Let has equal numbers of 0s and 1s

Show: is not regular
Proof by Contradiction:
Assume (for contradiction) that is regular.
We know that is regular so is regular (closure under intersection).
But and we already showed is not regular. Contradiction!
Therefore our assumption is false, so is not regular.