Advertisement

Petri Net Languages and One-Sided Dyck-Reductions On Context-Free Sets

  • M. Jantzen
  • H. Petersen

Abstract

In [2, 6, 8, 9] cancellation grammars (or grammars related to them) are defined and their relation to well-known families of languages are studied. Savitch showed in [9] that the class of EOL languages can be obtained from the context-free sets (CF) by iteratively and completely cancelling one matching pair xx̄ of parenthesis x and x̄. This type of reduction is here called a Dyck1-reduction on a set L which can be taken from any family of languages — not only the context-free sets — and thus need not be definable by certain restricted classes of grammars as in [2, 9]. In this short note we will show that we get all (free) terminal Petri net languages and all transition sequences from the context-free sets by Dyck1-reductions and, moreover, each non-erasing homomorphic image thereof, the corresponding families denoted by L and P as in [7].

Keywords

Word Problem Transition Sequence Sentential Form Thue System Recursively Enumerable 
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]
    R. Book, M. Jantzen, C. Wrathall: Monadic Thue Systems, Theoret. Comput. Sci, 19(1982) 231–251.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    V. Geffert: Grammars with context dependency restricted to synchronization, Proc. MFCS 86, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 233, Springer-Verlag (1986) 370–378.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    S.A. Greibach: Full AFL’s and nested iterated substitution, Information and Control, 16(1970) 7–35.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. Jantzen: Language theory of Petri nets, Proc. Advanced Course on Petri Nets, Bad Honnef (1986), to appear 1987.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. van Leeuwen: A generalization of Parikh’s theorem in formal language theory, Proc. ICALP 74, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 14, Springer-Verlag (1974) 17–26.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    H. Petersen: Klammer-Löschungs-Grammatiken und Dyckreduktionen auf kontextfreien Sprachen, Stuäienarbeit am FB Informatik, Univ. Hamburg (1986).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J.L. Peterson: Petri Net Theory and the Modeling of Systems, Prentice Hall (1981).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    B. Rovan: A framework for studying grammars, Proc. MFCS 81, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 118, Springer-Verlag (1981) 473–482.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    W.J. Savitch: Parantheses grammars and Lindenmayer systems, in: G. Rozenberg, A. Salomaa (eds), The Book of L, Sprinaer-Verlag (1986) 403–411.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Jantzen
    • 1
  • H. Petersen
    • 1
  1. 1.FB InformatikUniversität HamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations