Scribd
Upload
44 views6 pages

Birla Institute of Technology: Theory of Computation (Ca415)

The document discusses the equivalence of DFAs (Deterministic Finite Automata) and NFAs (Nondeterministic Finite Automata). It states that while DFAs and NFAs operate differently, with DFAs having exactly one transition per state and symbol and NFAs allowing multiple or no transitions, they are equivalent in terms of the languages they can recognize. It provides methods to prove the equivalence of two DFAs or NFAs, such as constructing product automata or converting NFAs to equivalent DFAs using subset construction.

Uploaded by

AMAN KUMAR
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
44 views6 pages

Birla Institute of Technology: Theory of Computation (Ca415)

The document discusses the equivalence of DFAs (Deterministic Finite Automata) and NFAs (Nondeterministic Finite Automata). It states that while DFAs and NFAs operate differently, with DFAs having exactly one transition per state and symbol and NFAs allowing multiple or no transitions, they are equivalent in terms of the languages they can recognize. It provides methods to prove the equivalence of two DFAs or NFAs, such as constructing product automata or converting NFAs to equivalent DFAs using subset construction.

Uploaded by

AMAN KUMAR
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

MESRA (JAIPUR CAMPUS)

THEORY OF COMPUTATION (CA415)

Submitted by: Samyak Jain


Roll No: MCA/25014/22
Semester: 2nd
Submitted to: Madan Mohan Sir
DFA’s(Deterministic Finite Automata) and
NFA’s(Nondeterministic Finite Automata) are
equivalent – this means that for any language
that can be recognized by an NFA , there exists
a DFA that recognizes the same language , and
vice versa.

However, the construction of DFA’s and NFA’s


differs in terms of how they operate. DFA;s
have exactly one transition for each input
symbol for each state , while NFA’s can have
multiple transition for a single input symbol
from a state , or even no transition for some
input symbols.

To convert an NFA to a DFA , we use the


powerset construction , which involves creating
a new DFA whose states are sets of states from
the original NFA. The transitions of the new
DFA are determined based on the transitions of
original NFA and the new DFA’s accepting
states are those that contain an accepting state
of the original NFA . This construction ensures
that the new DFA recognizes the same
language as the original NFA.

Conversely , to convert a DFA to an NFA , we


simply remove the requirement that there is
exactly one transition for each input symbol
from each state , and allow for multiple or no
transitions . This may create new paths that
were not present in the original DFA , but since
the language recognized by the DFA is a subset
of the language recognized by the resulting NFA
, the new NFA still recognizes the same
language as the original DFA.

While DFA’s and NFA’s may differ in their


construction and operation , they are
equivalent in terms of recognizing the same set
of languages.

Equivalence of DFAs
Two DFAs(Deterministic Finite Automata) are
said to be equivalent if they recognize the same
language . In other words , if the two DFAs
accept exactly the same set of strings over the
same alphabet.

To prove that two DFAs are equivalent , we can


follow these steps:

1. Construct the product automaton of the


two DFAs. The product automaton is
formed by taking the cross product pf the
states of the two DFAs .

2. For each state is the product automaton


, determine whether it is an accepting state
or not . A state in the product automaton is
an accepting state if and only if the
corresponding state in the DFA is accepting
and the corresponding state in the second
DFA is also accepting.
3. If the product automaton has no
unreachable states and has the same
accepting states as one of the original DFAs
, then the two DFAs are equivalent.

Alternatively , we can use the Myhill – Nerode


theorem to prove the equivalence of two DFAs .
The theorem states that two DFAs are
equivalent if and only if they have the same set
of distinguishing strings . A distinguishing string
is a sting that is accepted by one DFA and
rejected by the other . We can use the theorem
to construct a table of all possible prefixes of
the strings that are accepted by the two DFAs
and use it to determine whether the two DFAs
are equivalent or not .

Equivalence of NFAs
Two non – deterministic finite automata(NFAs)
are said to be equivalent if they recognize the
same language that is , if they accept the same
set of strings.

To prove the equivalence of two NFAs , you can


follow these steps:

1. Convert each NFA to a DFA using subset


construction algorithm.

2. Compare the resulting DFAs to see if


they have the same set of states , same
initial state , same set of accepting states ,
and same transition function.

3. If the two DFAs are identical , then the


original NFAs are equivalent.

You might also like