Context-free complete language
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Is there a notion of a context-free complete language (in the analogous sense to a $NP$-complete language)?
formal-languages computability context-free
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Is there a notion of a context-free complete language (in the analogous sense to a $NP$-complete language)?
formal-languages computability context-free
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Is there a notion of a context-free complete language (in the analogous sense to a $NP$-complete language)?
formal-languages computability context-free
Is there a notion of a context-free complete language (in the analogous sense to a $NP$-complete language)?
formal-languages computability context-free
formal-languages computability context-free
edited 1 hour ago
Thinh D. Nguyen
3,63111468
3,63111468
asked 2 hours ago
user1767774
1226
1226
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Yes.
Lautemann and Schwentick prove that Greibach's "hardest context-free grammar" with a neutral symbol is complete for $LOGCFL$ and hence $CFL$ also, under quantifier-free projection without BIT.
This is Corollary 4.3 in their paper
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Yes.
Lautemann and Schwentick prove that Greibach's "hardest context-free grammar" with a neutral symbol is complete for $LOGCFL$ and hence $CFL$ also, under quantifier-free projection without BIT.
This is Corollary 4.3 in their paper
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Yes.
Lautemann and Schwentick prove that Greibach's "hardest context-free grammar" with a neutral symbol is complete for $LOGCFL$ and hence $CFL$ also, under quantifier-free projection without BIT.
This is Corollary 4.3 in their paper
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Yes.
Lautemann and Schwentick prove that Greibach's "hardest context-free grammar" with a neutral symbol is complete for $LOGCFL$ and hence $CFL$ also, under quantifier-free projection without BIT.
This is Corollary 4.3 in their paper
Yes.
Lautemann and Schwentick prove that Greibach's "hardest context-free grammar" with a neutral symbol is complete for $LOGCFL$ and hence $CFL$ also, under quantifier-free projection without BIT.
This is Corollary 4.3 in their paper
answered 1 hour ago
Thinh D. Nguyen
3,63111468
3,63111468
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcs.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f99477%2fcontext-free-complete-language%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password