1 Equivalence of PDA's and CFG'S: 1.1 From Grammar To Pushdown Automata

MA513: Formal Languages and Automata Theory
Topic: Pushdown Automata (PDA) Continued

Lecture Number 25 Date: October 11, 2011
1 Equivalence of PDA’s and CFG’s

The goal is to prove that the following three classes of the languages are all the same
class.
1. The context-free languages (The language defined by CFG’s).
2. The languages that are accepted by empty stack by some PDA.
3. The languages that are accepted by final state by some PDA.
PDA by PDA by
Grammar empty stack final state
Figure 1: Organization of constructions showing equivalence of three ways of defining

the CFL’s
We have already shown that (2) and (3) are the same. Now, we prove that (1) and
(2) are same.
Recall the following theorem from the chapter context-free grammar.
Theorem: Let G = (V, T, R, S) be a CFG, and suppose there is a parse tree

with root labeled by variable A and with yield w(∈ T ∗ ). Then there is a leftmost
∗
derivation A ⇒lm w in grammar G.
1.1 From Grammar to Pushdown Automata

Given a CFG G, we construct a PDA that simulates the leftmost derivations of G.
Any left-sentential form that is not a terminal string can be written as xAα, where
A is the leftmost variable, x is whatever terminals appear to its left, and α is the
string of terminals and variables that appear to the right of A. We call Aα the tail
of this left-sentential form. If a left-sentential form consists of terminals only, then
its tail is .
The idea behind the construction of a PDA from a grammar is to have the PDA
simulate the sequence of left-sentential forms that the grammar uses to generate a
given terminal string w. The tail of each sentential form xAα appears on the stack,
1
with A at the top. At that time, x will be represented by our having consumed x
from the input, leaving whatever of w follows its prefix x. That is, if w = xy, then
y will remain on the input.
Suppose the PDA is in an ID (q, y, Aα), representing left-sentential form xAα. It
guesses the production to use to expand A, say A → β. The move of the PDA is
to replace A on the top of the stack by β, entering ID (q, y, βα). Note that there is
only one state, q, for this PDA.
Now, (q, y, βα) may not be a representation of the next left-sentential form, because
β may have a prefix of terminals. In fact, β may have no variables at all, and α
may have a prefix of terminals. Whatever terminals appear at the beginning of βα
need to be removed, to expose the next variable at the top of the stack. These
terminals are compared against the next input symbols, to make sure our guesses at
the leftmost derivation of input string w are correct; if not, this branch of the PDA
dies.
If we succeed in this way to guess a leftmost derivation of w, then we shall eventually
reach the left-sentential form w. At that point, all the symbols on the stack have
either been expanded (if they are variables) or matched against the input (if they
are terminals). The stack is empty, and we accept by empty stack.
The above informal construction can be maid precise as follows. Let G = (V, T, R, S)
be a CFG. Construct the PDA P that accepts L(G) by empty stack as follows:
P = ({q}, T, V ∪ T, δ, q, S)
where transition function δ is defined by:
1. For each variable A, δ(q, , A) = {(q, β)|A → β is a production of P }.
2. For each terminal a, δ(q, a, a) = {(q, )}.
Example: Consider the grammar G = (V, T, R, S) with V = {S}, T = {a, b, c},

and R = {S → aSa, S → bSb, S → c}, which generates the language {wcw R |w ∈
{a, b}∗ }. The corresponding pushdown automaton (acceptance by empty stack) is
P = ({q}, T, V ∪ T, δ, q, S), where the transition function δ is given by:
a) δ(q, , S) = {(q, aSa), (q, bSb), (q, c)}
b) δ(q, a, a) = (q, ), δ(q, b, b) = (q, ), δ(q, c, c) = (q, )
Theorem: If PDA P is constructed from CFG G by the construction above, then

N(P ) = L(G).
See Hopcroft, Motwani and Ullman book for proof of this theorem.
2
1.2 From PDA’s to Grammar
The construction of an equivalent grammar uses variables each of which represent
an event consisting of:
1. The net popping of some symbol X from the stack.
2. A change in state from some p at the beginning to q when X has finally been
replaced by on the stack.
• If P = (Q, Σ, Γ, δ, q0 , z0 ) is a PDA, then there is a context-free grammar G =

(V, Σ, R, S) such that L(G) = N(P ), where the set of variables V consists of :
1. The special symbol S, which is the start symbol of G and
2. All symbols of the form [pXy], where p, q ∈ Q and x ∈ Γ.
The rules R of G are as follows:

∗
a) For all states p, G has the rules S → [q0 z0 p] (since (q0 , w, z0) ` (p, , )).
b) Let δ(q, a, X) contains the pair (r, Y1 Y2 . . . Yk ), where
1. a is either a symbol in Σ or a = .
2. k be any number, including 0, in which case the pair is (r, ).
Then for all lists of states r1 , r2 , . . . , rk , G has the rules

[qXrk ] → a[rY1 r1 ][r1 Y2 r2 ] . . . [rk−1Yk rk ]
This rules says that one way to pop X and go from state q to state rk is to
read a (which may be ), then use some input to pop Y1 off the stack which
going from state r to state r1 , then read some more input that pops Y2 off the
stack and goes from state r1 to state r2 , and so on.
Example: Consider the PDA PN = ({q}, {0, 1}, {Z, A, B}, δN , q, Z) in Figure 2.
The corresponding context-free grammar G = (V, {0, 1}, R, S) is given by:
Figure 2: Example of PDA
3
V = {S, [qZq], [qAq], [qBq]}.
R=
1. S → [qZq]
2. [qZq] → 0[[qAq][qZq] (since δN (q, 0, Z) contains (q, AZ))
3. [qZq] → 1[[qBq][qZq] (since δN (q, 1, Z) contains (q, BZ))
4. [qAq] → 0[[qAq][qAq] (since δN (q, 0, A) contains (q, AA))
5. [qBq] → 1[[qBq][qBq] (since δN (q, 1, B) contains (q, BB))
6. [qAq] → 1 (since δN (q, 1, A) contains (q, ))
7. [qBq] → 0 (since δN (q, 0, B) contains (q, ))
8. [qZq] → (since δN (q, , Z) contains (q, ))

1 Equivalence of PDA's and CFG'S: 1.1 From Grammar To Pushdown Automata

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 Equivalence of PDA's and CFG'S: 1.1 From Grammar To Pushdown Automata

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 Equivalence of PDA's and CFG'S: 1.1 From Grammar To Pushdown Automata

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MA513: Formal Languages and Automata Theory

Topic: Pushdown Automata (PDA) Continued

1 Equivalence of PDA’s and CFG’s

1. The context-free languages (The language defined by CFG’s).

2. The languages that are accepted by empty stack by some PDA.

3. The languages that are accepted by final state by some PDA.

Figure 1: Organization of constructions showing equivalence of three ways of defining

Theorem: Let G = (V, T, R, S) be a CFG, and suppose there is a parse tree

1.1 From Grammar to Pushdown Automata

1. For each variable A, δ(q, , A) = {(q, β)|A → β is a production of P }.

2. For each terminal a, δ(q, a, a) = {(q, )}.

Example: Consider the grammar G = (V, T, R, S) with V = {S}, T = {a, b, c},

a) δ(q, , S) = {(q, aSa), (q, bSb), (q, c)}

b) δ(q, a, a) = (q, ), δ(q, b, b) = (q, ), δ(q, c, c) = (q, )

Theorem: If PDA P is constructed from CFG G by the construction above, then

1. The net popping of some symbol X from the stack.

• If P = (Q, Σ, Γ, δ, q0 , z0 ) is a PDA, then there is a context-free grammar G =

1. The special symbol S, which is the start symbol of G and

2. All symbols of the form [pXy], where p, q ∈ Q and x ∈ Γ.

The rules R of G are as follows:

b) Let δ(q, a, X) contains the pair (r, Y1 Y2 . . . Yk ), where

Then for all lists of states r1 , r2 , . . . , rk , G has the rules

Figure 2: Example of PDA

You might also like

1. For each variable A, δ(q, , A) = {(q, β)|A → β is a production of P }.

2. For each terminal a, δ(q, a, a) = {(q, )}.

a) δ(q, , S) = {(q, aSa), (q, bSb), (q, c)}

b) δ(q, a, a) = (q, ), δ(q, b, b) = (q, ), δ(q, c, c) = (q, )