1 / 24

# Undecidable Problems From Language Theory - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Undecidable Problems From Language Theory. Lecture 33 Section 5.1 Wed, Nov 7, 2007. Reducibility. A problem A is reducible to a problem B if a solution to B gives us a solution to A . More specifically, an instance of problem A can be restated as an instance of problem B .

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Undecidable Problems From Language Theory' - clementine-ball

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

### Undecidable Problems From Language Theory

Lecture 33

Section 5.1

Wed, Nov 7, 2007

• A problem A is reducible to a problem B if a solution to B gives us a solution to A.

• More specifically, an instance of problem A can be restated as an instance of problem B.

• We will have a precise definition of reducibility later.

• Sorting a list of numbers reduces to the pair of problems

• Find the smallest number in a list.

• Swapping two numbers in a list.

• How could we reduce the problem of finding the area of the hexagon to simpler problems?

6

10

2

3

10

5

11

5

• How could we reduce the problem of finding the area of the hexagon to simpler problems?

6

10

2

3

10

5

11

5

• How could we reduce the problem of finding the area of the hexagon to simpler problems?

6

10

2

10

3

Area = 137.5

30

10

60

12.5

5

25

11

5

• In a very similar way, OpenGL reduces the problem of shading polygons to the problem of shading triangles.

• Theorem: If A is reducible to B and B is decidable, then A is decidable.

• Proof:

• Let R be a Turing machine that reduces A to B.

• Let DB be a decider of B.

DA

acc

acc

IB

IA

R

DB

rej

rej

Reducibility and Decidability

• Theorem: If A is reducible to B and A is undecidable, then B is undecidable.

• Proof:

• This is the contrapositive of the previous theorem.

• Define the language HALTTM to be

HALTTM = {M, w | M halts on w}.

• Theorem: HALTTM is undecidable.

• Proof:

• We will show that ATM is reducible to HALTTM.

• Suppose that HALTTM is decidable.

• Let DH be a decider for HALTTM.

• We build a decider DA for ATM.

acc

DA

acc

M, w

U

M, w

DH

rej

rej

rej

The Halting Problem for Turing Machines

• Thus, we could build a decider for ATM, which we know to be impossible.

• Therefore, HALTTM is undecidable.

• Define the language ETM to be

ETM = {M | L(M ) = }.

• Theorem: ETM is undecidable.

• Proof:

• Suppose ETM is decidable.

• Let DE be a decider for ETM.

• Let COMP be a Turing machine that compares two strings.

• Given M, w, build the Turing machine Mw as follows.

Mw

acc

acc

x = w

M, w

U

x

COMP

rej

rej

xw

The Emptiness Problem for Turing Machines

• What is the language of Mw?

• Let CONVERT be a Turing Machine that will read the M, w pair and construct the Turing machine Mw.

DA

acc

rej

M, w

Mw

CONVERT

DE

acc

rej

The Emptiness Problem for Turing Machines

• Thus, we could build a decider for ATM, which we know to be impossible.

• Therefore, ETM is undecidable.

• Define the language EQTM to be

EQTM = {A, B | L(A ) = L(B)}.

• Theorem: EQTM is undecidable.

• Proof:

• Suppose EQTM is decidable.

• Let DEQ be a decider for EQTM.

• Let M be a Turing machine that accepts no input.

DE

acc

acc

M

M, M

DEQ

rej

rej

The Emptiness Problem for Turing Machines

• What is the language of DE?

• Thus, we could build a decider for ETM, which we know to be impossible.

• Therefore, EQTM is undecidable.