Advertisement

Acta Informatica

, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp 265–283 | Cite as

Nonterminals versus homomorphisms in defining languages for some classes of rewriting systems

  • A. Ehrenfeucht
  • G. Rozenberg
Article

Abstract

Given a rewriting system G (its alphabet, the set of productions and the axiom) one can define the language of G by
  1. (i)

    taking out of all strings generated by G only those which are over a distinguished subalphabet of G, or

     
  2. (ii)

    translating the set of all strings generated by G by a fixed homomorphism.

     

The “trade-offs” between these two mechanisms for defining languages are discussed for both “parallel” rewriting systems from the developmental systems hierarchy and “sequential” rewriting systems from the Chomsky hierarchy.

Keywords

Information System Operating System Data Structure Communication Network Information Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Balzer, R.: The firing squad synchronization problem. Information and Control 10, 22–42 (1967)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chomsky, N.: Three models for the description of language. IRE Trans. Inform. Theory IT2, 113–124 (1956)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chomsky, N.: Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton and Company 1957Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davis, M.: Computability and Unsolvability. New York: McGraw-Hill 1958Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    van Dalen, D.: A note on some systems of Lindenmayer. Mathematical Systems Theory 5, 128–140 (1971)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ehrenfeucht, A., Rozenberg, G.: The equality of EOL languages and codings of OL languages. International J. Computer Mathematics, to appearGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ginsburg, S., Greibach, S.: Abstract families of languages. IEEE Conf. Record on 8th Annual Symp. on Switching and Automata Theory, 1967Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herman, G.: The computing ability of a developmental model for filamentous organisms. J. Theoretical Biology 25, 421–435 (1969)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herman, G.: Closure properties of some families of languages associated with biological systems. Information and Control 24, 101–121 (1974)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herman, G., Lindenmayer, A., Rozenberg, G.: Description of developmental languages using recurrence systems, Mathematical Systems Theory, to appearGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Herman, G., Rozenberg, G.: Developmental systems and languages, to be published by North-Holland Publishing Company. 1974Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Herman, G., Liu, W., Rowland, S., Walker, A.: Synchronization of growing cellular arrays. Quarterly Bulletin of the Center for Theoretical Biology, SUNY at Buffalo 5, 143–196 (1972)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hopcroft, J., Ullman, J.: Formal languages and their relation to automata. Reading (Mass.): Addison-Wesley 1969Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lindenmayer, A.: Mathematical models for cellular interactions in development. J. Theoretical Biology 18, 300–315 (1968)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lindenmeyer, A., Rozenberg, G.: Developmental systems and languages. Proc. of the 4th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Denver (Col.) 1972Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paz, A., Salomaa, A.: Integral sequential word function and growth equivalence of Lindenmayer Systems. Information and Control 23, 313–343 (1973)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rozenberg, G.: Extension of tabled OL systems and languages. International J. Computer and Information Sciences 2, 311–334 (1973)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rozenberg, G.: TOL systems and languages. Information and Control 23, 357–381 (1973)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rozenberg, G., Doucet, P.: On OL languages. Information and Control 19, 302–318 (1971)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Ehrenfeucht
    • 1
  • G. Rozenberg
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of ColoradoBoulderUSA
  2. 2.Institute of Mathematics University of UtrechtUtrecht-UithofThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of MathematicsAntwerp University, UIAWilrijkBelgium

Personalised recommendations