({{Template:Author|Arjun Suresh|{{arjunweb}} }})
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
$L_1 = \{< M, w, 1 > |$ $M$ does not halts on $w\}$  
 
$L_1 = \{< M, w, 1 > |$ $M$ does not halts on $w\}$  
  
Here $< M, w, i >$ is a triplet, whose first component. $M$ is an encoding of a Turing  
+
Here $< M, w, i >$ is a triplet, whose first component $M$ is an encoding of a Turing  
Machine, second component,$ w$, is a string, and third component, $i$, is a bit.  
+
Machine, second component $ w$ is a string, and third component $i$ is a bit.  
  
 
Let $L = L_0 ∪ L_1$. Which of the following is true ?  
 
Let $L = L_0 ∪ L_1$. Which of the following is true ?  
Line 20: Line 20:
 
==={{Template:Author|Arjun Suresh|{{arjunweb}} }}===
 
==={{Template:Author|Arjun Suresh|{{arjunweb}} }}===
  
Both $L$ and $Lʼ$ are undecidable. Because halting problem can be solved with both $L$ and $Lʼ$.  
+
Both $L$ and $Lʼ$ are undecidable and not even semi-decidable (not recursively-enumerable). Because halting problem can be solved with both $L$ and $Lʼ$.  
  
 
Halting problem can be stated as follows: A machine $M$ and a word $w$ are given. You have to tell, if $M$ halts on $w$.
 
Halting problem can be stated as follows: A machine $M$ and a word $w$ are given. You have to tell, if $M$ halts on $w$.
 
   
 
   
So, to solve halting problem $<M,w>$ using $L$, just give $<M,w,0>$ and $<M,w,1>$ to two instances of $T$ which is the Turing machine for $L$. If $T$ accepts the triplet $<M,w,0>$, it means $M$ halts on $w$ => we have solved halting problem. If $T$ accepts the triplet $<M,w,1>$, it means $M$ doesn't halt on $w$ => we have solved halting problem. We know that either $<M,w,0>$ or $<M,w,1>$ is in $L$. So, if $L$ is recursively enumerable, $T$ is bound to stop on at least one of these inputs (<math>TM</math> for a recursively enumerable language stops and accepts, when provided with a word in its language).   
+
So, to solve halting problem $<M,w>$ using $L$, just give $<M,w,0>$ and $<M,w,1>$ to two instances of $T$ which is the Turing machine for $L$. If $T$ accepts the triplet $<M,w,0>$, it means $M$ halts on $w$ => we have solved halting problem. If $T$ accepts the triplet $<M,w,1>$, it means $M$ doesn't halt on $w$ => we have solved halting problem. We know that either $<M,w,0>$ or $<M,w,1>$ is in $L$. So, if $L$ is recursively enumerable, $T$ is bound to stop on at least one of these inputs ($TM$ for a recursively enumerable language stops and accepts, when provided with a word in its language).   
  
 
Hence, using $L$ we can solve halting problem  => $L$ is not recursively enumerable.
 
Hence, using $L$ we can solve halting problem  => $L$ is not recursively enumerable.

Latest revision as of 19:40, 10 September 2014

Define languages L0 and L1 as follows :

$L_0 = \{< M, w, 0 > |$ $M$ halts on $w\} $

$L_1 = \{< M, w, 1 > |$ $M$ does not halts on $w\}$

Here $< M, w, i >$ is a triplet, whose first component $M$ is an encoding of a Turing Machine, second component $ w$ is a string, and third component $i$ is a bit.

Let $L = L_0 ∪ L_1$. Which of the following is true ?

(A) $L$ is recursively enumerable, but is not

(B) $L$ is recursively enumerable, but $ L'$ is not

(C) Both $L$ and $L'$ are recursive

(D) Neither $L$ nor $L'$ is recursively enumerable

Solution by Arjun Suresh

Both $L$ and $Lʼ$ are undecidable and not even semi-decidable (not recursively-enumerable). Because halting problem can be solved with both $L$ and $Lʼ$.

Halting problem can be stated as follows: A machine $M$ and a word $w$ are given. You have to tell, if $M$ halts on $w$.

So, to solve halting problem $<M,w>$ using $L$, just give $<M,w,0>$ and $<M,w,1>$ to two instances of $T$ which is the Turing machine for $L$. If $T$ accepts the triplet $<M,w,0>$, it means $M$ halts on $w$ => we have solved halting problem. If $T$ accepts the triplet $<M,w,1>$, it means $M$ doesn't halt on $w$ => we have solved halting problem. We know that either $<M,w,0>$ or $<M,w,1>$ is in $L$. So, if $L$ is recursively enumerable, $T$ is bound to stop on at least one of these inputs ($TM$ for a recursively enumerable language stops and accepts, when provided with a word in its language).

Hence, using $L$ we can solve halting problem => $L$ is not recursively enumerable. Similarly, we can also show that halting problem can be solved with $Lʼ$.

Hence, neither $L$ nor $Lʼ$ is recursively enumerable.



blog comments powered by Disqus

Define languages L0 and L1 as follows :

$L_0 = \{< M, w, 0 > |$ $M$ halts on $w\} $

$L_1 = \{< M, w, 1 > |$ $M$ does not halts on $w\}$

Here $< M, w, i >$ is a triplet, whose first component. $M$ is an encoding of a Turing Machine, second component,$ w$, is a string, and third component, $i$, is a bit.

Let $L = L_0 ∪ L_1$. Which of the following is true ?

(A) $L$ is recursively enumerable, but is not

(B) $L$ is recursively enumerable, but $ L'$ is not

(C) Both $L$ and $L'$ are recursive

(D) Neither $L$ nor $L'$ is recursively enumerable

Solution by Arjun Suresh[edit]

Both $L$ and $Lʼ$ are undecidable. Because halting problem can be solved with both $L$ and $Lʼ$.

Halting problem can be stated as follows: A machine $M$ and a word $w$ are given. You have to tell, if $M$ halts on $w$.

So, to solve halting problem $<M,w>$ using $L$, just give $<M,w,0>$ and $<M,w,1>$ to two instances of $T$ which is the Turing machine for $L$. If $T$ accepts the triplet $<M,w,0>$, it means $M$ halts on $w$ => we have solved halting problem. If $T$ accepts the triplet $<M,w,1>$, it means $M$ doesn't halt on $w$ => we have solved halting problem. We know that either $<M,w,0>$ or $<M,w,1>$ is in $L$. So, if $L$ is recursively enumerable, $T$ is bound to stop on at least one of these inputs (<math>TM</math> for a recursively enumerable language stops and accepts, when provided with a word in its language).

Hence, using $L$ we can solve halting problem => $L$ is not recursively enumerable. Similarly, we can also show that halting problem can be solved with $Lʼ$.

Hence, neither $L$ nor $Lʼ$ is recursively enumerable.



blog comments powered by Disqus