March 3, 2026
Which of the following is a minimum DFA over the alfabeth \Sigma=\{a,b\}?
\begin{array}{r|ll} & a & b \\ \hline \to A & B & A \\ B & B & C\\ C & D & A \\ D & D & E\ \text{+}\\ E & D & F\ \text{+}\\ F & F & D\ \text{+} \end{array}
\begin{array}{r|ll} & a & b \\ \hline \to A & B & A \\ B & B & C\\ C & D & A \\ D & B & C\ \text{+} \end{array}
\begin{array}{r|ll} & a & b \\ \hline \to A & B & B \\ B & C & C \ \text{+}\\ C & D & D \\ D & E & E\\ E & F & F\ \text{+}\\ F & A & A \end{array}
Proof.
Given two arbitrary languages L_1,L_2 let L_1\Delta L_2 = (L_1\cup L_2)\setminus (L_1\cap L_2)\ .
Which of the following statements is false?
A proof template.
This works also to show that L does not have a DFA with less than a certain number k of states: just use T s.t. |T|\geq k.
Proof (long, make sure to scroll until you see \square).
Proof template.
As for the case of \{a^nb^n \mid n\in \mathbb N\}, the idea is to choose w carefully to restrict the possibilities for x,y,z
Theorem 1 If \begin{align*} \forall p\in \mathbb N\ \exists w\in L,\ |w|> p \land \forall x,y,z (w=xyz \land |xy|\leq p \land |y|\geq 1 \\ \implies \exists i\in \mathbb N\ xy^iz\notin L \end{align*} then L is not \mathbf{REGULAR}.
Caution
The Pumping Lemma cannot be used to prove that a language is \mathbf{REGULAR}.
Which of the following sentences is false?
Given the following equation between languages X = (a + \lambda)X + b\ , which of the following sentences is false?
Given L=\{w\in \{0,1\}^* \mid \mathrm{value}_2(w)\in 3\mathbb N\}. Consider the sets
\{0,1\}\qquad \{0,1,10\}\qquad\{0,1,10,11\}
How many of them are L-distinguishible?
A set S is L-distinguishible if for every pair of distinct words w_1,w_2\in S, there is a word z s.t. exactly one between w_1z and w_2z is in L.
You want to show that L=\{a^nb^m \mid n\neq m\} is not a regular language applying the pumping lemma directly to L.
Given the pumping length p, you choose a word w as in the argument to apply the pumping lemma. Which of the following possibilities has a chance to make the rest of the argument correct?