Create a pushdown automata for the following language - automation

So I was doing practice problems in my book and I spotted this question.
Construct an npda accepting the language L on sigma(a,b,c).
L={w: number of a= number of b+1}
so I am interpreting it as it accepts all strings that has one more a then the letter b. I believe that all the states should have a loop that has a transition (c,landa, landa) since we do not really care about the c's. After this I get really confused because there are so many cases to cover since the placement of a's and b's are arbitrary. What is the way to get this problem figured out? Thanks!!

A PDA can use a stack to remember arbitrary amounts of information. This makes PDAs infinitely more capable than finite automata. The key to determining the PDA is figuring out how the stack will be used and then building a PDA around that.
How can we use a stack to ensure the number of as is equal to the number of bs, plus one? Well, the stack can easily keep track of the running balance of symbols that have been seen. For instance, if we have seen four as and two bs, our stack might represent this fact by containing aaZ, where Z is the "bottom of stack" symbol. Of course, there are other methods we might use and other representations, but this is a particularly neat one for this class of problem. To fully explain the representation:
The stack is initially Z, just the bottom of stack symbol.
If we see an a and the top of the stack is a or Z, we add another a.
If we see an a and the top of the stack is b, we remove one b.
If we see a b and the top of the stack is b or Z, we add another b.
If we see a b and the top of the stack is a, we remove one a.
If we see a c, leave the stack alone.
If we do this over and over again for all the input, then the content of the stack will be equal to x^m, where x is whichever of a and b occurs more frequently, and m is the absolute value of the difference of the numbers of each symbol.
To accept your language, you must simply recognize the case where the input is exhausted and the stack consists is equal to aZ. This can be done by adding some state(s) and lambda/epsilon transitions to clear the stack and/or enter an accepting state.
Thanks to Peter Leupold for pointing out that the rest of the original answer got the grammar wrong. I made an attempt to fix it and didn't like how long the answer was getting, so I omitted that. I will simply add that another possibility is to produce a CFG for a language and use an algorithm to derive a PDA for it. In this case, for me, giving the PDA directly was a lot less wordy.

Related

How to constrain dtw from dtw-python library?

Here is what I want to do:
keep a reference curve unchanged (only shift and stretch a query curve)
constrain how many elements are duplicated
keep both start and end open
I tried:
dtw(ref_curve,query_curve,step_pattern=asymmetric,open_end=True,open_begin=True)
but I cannot constrain how the query curve is stretched
dtw(ref_curve,query_curve,step_pattern=mvmStepPattern(10))
it didn’t do anything to the curves!
dtw(ref_curve,query_curve,step_pattern=rabinerJuangStepPattern(4, "c"),open_end=True, open_begin=True)
I liked this one the most but in some cases it shifts the query curve more than needed...
I read the paper (https://www.jstatsoft.org/article/view/v031i07) and the API but still don't quite understand how to achieve what I want. Any other options to constrain number of elements that are duplicated? I would appreciate your help!
to clarify: we are talking about functions provided by the DTW suite packages at dynamictimewarping.github.io. The question is in fact language-independent (and may be more suited to the Cross-validated Stack Exchange).
The pattern rabinerJuangStepPattern(4, "c") you have found does in fact satisfy your requirements:
it's asymmetric, and each step advances the reference by exactly one step
it's slope-limited between 1/2 and 2
it's type "c", so can be normalized in a way that allows open-begin and open-end
If you haven't already, check out dtw.rabinerJuangStepPattern(4, "c").plot().
It goes without saying that in all cases you are getting is the optimal alignment, i.e. the one with the least accumulated distance among all allowed paths.
As an alternative, you may consider the simpler asymmetric recursion -- as your first attempt above -- constrained with a global warping window: see dtw.window and the window_type argument. This provides constraints of a different shape (and flexible size), which might suit your specific case.
PS: edited to add that the asymmetricP2 recursion is also similar to RJ-4c, but with a more constrained slope.

Genetic algorithms for guillotine cut optimization

Ive been revisiting genetic algorithms with encoding, optimizing and decoding. My first attempt was the travelling salesman with ordered cross over which worked great. I found an article that tried to optimize a more complex genome while optimizing a 2d packing problem.
The author encodes the problem using reverse polish notation that made sense. It uses a combination of parts and either V Or H as opertors.
Ie 34H5V
With decoding the stack having to be resolved to one stack element that is my final layout. That being said, the number of operater up until a certain point must be 1 less than the number of parts up until the same point. The author then states that he used a mixed cross over by using an ordered cross over on the parts and binary crossover for the operators.
I mulled this over but i cannot understand how he seperates the parts and operators before crossing over and then recombines them before evaluating performance and they offer little details. If a binary cross over occured replacing parts with an "X" to keep the relative positions so they can be recombined after crossover but the relationship between operator and parts doesnt hold true.
Does anyone perhaps have a resource that has dealt with a similar scenario or perhaps has used this successfully.
This looked way more difficult than it actually was. When the original population is generated, you need to adhere to the limitations set out by postfix notation. When a crossover occurs you simply build a mask of the parent
Ie xxxxooxoxx
Where x is an object and o is an operaror. Once you have the mask holding the positions you can create a sting only of operators and one only of objects. The operators can be done with a binary cross over and the objects as partial map crossover. Once done you fill the mask with the value in the order they appear in each group. Since the mask was valid, the progeny is valid too.
The only issue ia getting all the possible arrangements because without it, it will all be limited to the masks. He solves this by doing a swap mutation dictated by the mutation rates.
Select an item at random.
If the item is an operator then
A. Swithc the operator to another kind
B. Select another. If its an object then make sure the requirementa are met and if so then switch.

Text questions with multiple choices randomisation

I have a text file that contains over 11 thousand multiple choice and matching questions. The questions have different sizes, besides having different number of given choices. The following block is a sample of matching question with five given choices taken from that text file:
Type: MT
1) Can you match each of these cities to their location? Drag the cities on the right to match them with the locations on the left.
~ Correct. You got all these matches correct.
# Incorrect. You got some of these wrong.
a. North = Turin
b. Center = Rome
c. South = Naples
d. Sicily = Palermo
e. Sardinia = Cagliari
Before processing this file into a HTML generating engine, I need to shuffle all those questions, i.e. to randomly change the position of each question as a block in the file, so the final product will be extremely unpredictable. Each question number (as mentioned under Type:) is insignificant.
I found a Word vba code at this link, but it does need lots of expert alterations to accommodate variant sizes of questions.
Expert assistance in this matter is deeply appreciated. Thanks in advance.
First, I agree with Tim Williams in the comments above that this is not exactly the level of specificity that is expected in a StackOverflow posting.
That said, if I were you, I would break this question down into two components.
First - figure out if there is a text string that can be used to identify the blocks that constitute the "question." For example, if each question starts with "Type:", then you can find the first instance of this in the file, then find the second, and everything between them constitutes a "question". Then, you can place that question in an array.
Second - randomize the array. There are probably a ton of ways to do this. One might be to use a randbetween function between 0 and the length of the array of questions twice, and switch the questions for each of the random numbers. Then, repeat that a number of times relative to the total number of items in the array (for example, if you have 100 questions, perform the "switch" 125 times to sufficiently randomize the output. Then print the array back to the original file.
For the approach above, you need some delimiter in your file (I assumed the delimiter was "Type:") to break the questions above. If a delimiter like this doesn't exist, you may need some more complicated logic.

explain based on the knowledge of hardware why "Certain floating-point values cannot be exactly represented inside the computer’s memory"?

In the second line of the program’s output, notice that the value of
331.79, which is assigned to floatingVar, is actually displayed as 331.790009.The reason for this inaccuracy is the particular way in which numbers are internally represented inside the computer.You
have probably come across the same type of inaccuracy when dealing
with numbers on your calculator. If you divide 1 by 3 on your
calculator, you get the result .33333333, with perhaps some additional
3s tacked on at the end.The string of 3s is the calculator’s
approximation to one third.Theoretically, there should be an infinite
number of 3s. But the calculator can hold only so many digits, thus
the inherent inaccuracy of the machine.The same type of inaccuracy
applies here: Certain floatingpoint values cannot be exactly
represented inside the computer’s memory.
the above quote comes from Programming in Objective-C – 4th edition
And this post answered a little part but not the kind of answer i'm trying to look for.
Will try to find another book about this later in the day.
Anyway if anyone would like to answer this question, thanks!

Building ranking with genetic algorithm,

Question after BIG edition :
I need to built a ranking using genetic algorithm, I have data like this :
P(a>b)=0.9
P(b>c)=0.7
P(c>d)=0.8
P(b>d)=0.3
now, lets interpret a,b,c,d as names of football teams, and P(x>y) is probability that x wins with y. We want to build ranking of teams, we lack some observations P(a>d),P(a>c) are missing due to lack of matches between a vs d and a vs c.
Goal is to find ordering of team names, which the best describes current situation in that four team league.
If we have only 4 teams than solution is straightforward, first we compute probabilities for all 4!=24 orderings of four teams, while ignoring missing values we have :
P(abcd)=P(a>b)P(b>c)P(c>d)P(b>d)
P(abdc)=P(a>b)P(b>c)(1-P(c>d))P(b>d)
...
P(dcba)=(1-P(a>b))(1-P(b>c))(1-P(c>d))(1-P(b>d))
and we choose the ranking with highest probability. I don't want to use any other fitness function.
My question :
As numbers of permutations of n elements is n! calculation of probabilities for all
orderings is impossible for large n (my n is about 40). I want to use genetic algorithm for that problem.
Mutation operator is simple switching of places of two (or more) elements of ranking.
But how to make crossover of two orderings ?
Could P(abcd) be interpreted as cost function of path 'abcd' in assymetric TSP problem but cost of travelling from x to y is different than cost of travelling from y to x, P(x>y)=1-P(y<x) ? There are so many crossover operators for TSP problem, but I think I have to design my own crossover operator, because my problem is slightly different from TSP. Do you have any ideas for solution or frame for conceptual analysis ?
The easiest way, on conceptual and implementation level, is to use crossover operator which make exchange of suborderings between two solutions :
CrossOver(ABcD,AcDB) = AcBD
for random subset of elements (in this case 'a,b,d' in capital letters) we copy and paste first subordering - sequence of elements 'a,b,d' to second ordering.
Edition : asymetric TSP could be turned into symmetric TSP, but with forbidden suborderings, which make GA approach unsuitable.
It's definitely an interesting problem, and it seems most of the answers and comments have focused on the semantic aspects of the problem (i.e., the meaning of the fitness function, etc.).
I'll chip in some information about the syntactic elements -- how do you do crossover and/or mutation in ways that make sense. Obviously, as you noted with the parallel to the TSP, you have a permutation problem. So if you want to use a GA, the natural representation of candidate solutions is simply an ordered list of your points, careful to avoid repitition -- that is, a permutation.
TSP is one such permutation problem, and there are a number of crossover operators (e.g., Edge Assembly Crossover) that you can take from TSP algorithms and use directly. However, I think you'll have problems with that approach. Basically, the problem is this: in TSP, the important quality of solutions is adjacency. That is, abcd has the same fitness as cdab, because it's the same tour, just starting and ending at a different city. In your example, absolute position is much more important that this notion of relative position. abcd means in a sense that a is the best point -- it's important that it came first in the list.
The key thing you have to do to get an effective crossover operator is to account for what the properties are in the parents that make them good, and try to extract and combine exactly those properties. Nick Radcliffe called this "respectful recombination" (note that paper is quite old, and the theory is now understood a bit differently, but the principle is sound). Taking a TSP-designed operator and applying it to your problem will end up producing offspring that try to conserve irrelevant information from the parents.
You ideally need an operator that attempts to preserve absolute position in the string. The best one I know of offhand is known as Cycle Crossover (CX). I'm missing a good reference off the top of my head, but I can point you to some code where I implemented it as part of my graduate work. The basic idea of CX is fairly complicated to describe, and much easier to see in action. Take the following two points:
abcdefgh
cfhgedba
Pick a starting point in parent 1 at random. For simplicity, I'll just start at position 0 with the "a".
Now drop straight down into parent 2, and observe the value there (in this case, "c").
Now search for "c" in parent 1. We find it at position 2.
Now drop straight down again, and observe the "h" in parent 2, position 2.
Again, search for this "h" in parent 1, found at position 7.
Drop straight down and observe the "a" in parent 2.
At this point note that if we search for "a" in parent one, we reach a position where we've already been. Continuing past that will just cycle. In fact, we call the sequence of positions we visited (0, 2, 7) a "cycle". Note that we can simply exchange the values at these positions between the parents as a group and both parents will retain the permutation property, because we have the same three values at each position in the cycle for both parents, just in different orders.
Make the swap of the positions included in the cycle.
Note that this is only one cycle. You then repeat this process starting from a new (unvisited) position each time until all positions have been included in a cycle. After the one iteration described in the above steps, you get the following strings (where an "X" denotes a position in the cycle where the values were swapped between the parents.
cbhdefga
afcgedbh
X X X
Just keep finding and swapping cycles until you're done.
The code I linked from my github account is going to be tightly bound to my own metaheuristics framework, but I think it's a reasonably easy task to pull the basic algorithm out from the code and adapt it for your own system.
Note that you can potentially gain quite a lot from doing something more customized to your particular domain. I think something like CX will make a better black box algorithm than something based on a TSP operator, but black boxes are usually a last resort. Other people's suggestions might lead you to a better overall algorithm.
I've worked on a somewhat similar ranking problem and followed a technique similar to what I describe below. Does this work for you:
Assume the unknown value of an object diverges from your estimate via some distribution, say, the normal distribution. Interpret your ranking statements such as a > b, 0.9 as the statement "The value a lies at the 90% percentile of the distribution centered on b".
For every statement:
def realArrival = calculate a's location on a distribution centered on b
def arrivalGap = | realArrival - expectedArrival |
def fitness = Σ arrivalGap
Fitness function is MIN(fitness)
FWIW, my problem was actually a bin-packing problem, where the equivalent of your "rank" statements were user-provided rankings (1, 2, 3, etc.). So not quite TSP, but NP-Hard. OTOH, bin-packing has a pseudo-polynomial solution proportional to accepted error, which is what I eventually used. I'm not quite sure that would work with your probabilistic ranking statements.
What an interesting problem! If I understand it, what you're really asking is:
"Given a weighted, directed graph, with each edge-weight in the graph representing the probability that the arc is drawn in the correct direction, return the complete sequence of nodes with maximum probability of being a topological sort of the graph."
So if your graph has N edges, there are 2^N graphs of varying likelihood, with some orderings appearing in more than one graph.
I don't know if this will help (very brief Google searches did not enlighten me, but maybe you'll have more success with more perseverance) but my thoughts are that looking for "topological sort" in conjunction with any of "probabilistic", "random", "noise," or "error" (because the edge weights can be considered as a reliability factor) might be helpful.
I strongly question your assertion, in your example, that P(a>c) is not needed, though. You know your application space best, but it seems to me that specifying P(a>c) = 0.99 will give a different fitness for f(abc) than specifying P(a>c) = 0.01.
You might want to throw in "Bayesian" as well, since you might be able to start to infer values for (in your example) P(a>c) given your conditions and hypothetical solutions. The problem is, "topological sort" and "bayesian" is going to give you a whole bunch of hits related to markov chains and markov decision problems, which may or may not be helpful.