Ambiguity + Chomsky Normal Form: November 11, 2013

German University in Cairo, Winter 2013
Ambiguity + Chomsky Normal Form

Lecture 10
November 11, 2013
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
Objectives
By the end of this lecture, you should be able to
Give a leftmost derivation of a string in some CFG.
Determine whether a CFG is ambiguous.
Determine whether a CFG is in Chomsky normal form.
Convert a CFG into one in Chomsky normal form.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
Ambiguity
A CFG G is ambiguous if it generates some string with more
than one parse tree.
Such a string will have different meanings.
Example: Consider a grammar G for arithmetic expressions.
hexpri
hexpri + hexpri | hexpri hexpri
(hexpri) | a
G is ambiguous.
Draw two different parse trees for the string a + a a
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
An Ambiguous Grammar for English

hsentencei
hnoun-phraseihverb-phrasei
hnoun-phrasei
hcmplx-nouni | hcmplx-nounihprep-phrasei
hverb-phrasei
hcmplx-verbi | hcmplx-verbihprep-phrasei
hprep-phrasei
hprepihcmplx-nouni
hcmplx-nouni
harticleihnouni
hcmplx-verbi
hverbi | hverbihnoun-phrasei
harticlei
a | the
hnouni
boy | girl | flower
hverbi
touches | likes | sees
hprepi
with
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
Derivations and Parse Trees

For every derivation there is a unique corresponding parse tree.
The same parse tree may correspond to two different
derivations, though.
Two derivations differ in two respects:
which variable is chosen for substitution at a given step, and
which rule is used to rewrite the chosen variable.
Two derivations that differ only in the first respect would have
the same parse tree.
To formally define ambiguities in terms of derivations, we fix a
strategy for choosing variables for substitution.
A derivation is a leftmost derivation if the variable chosen
for substitution, at any step, is the leftmost variable.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
Definition of Ambiguity
A string w is derived ambiguously in CFG G if it has two or
more leftmost derivations.
CFG G is ambiguous if it generates some string ambiguously.
Can you give a formal definition of ambiguity?
Prove that the grammar G for arithmetic expressions is
ambiguous.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
Chomsky Normal Form

A CFG (V, , R, S) is in Chomsky normal form (CNF) if
every rule is in one of the following forms.
1. S
2. A BC
Where A V , and B, C V {S}
3. A a
Where A V and a
Writing grammars in CNF simplify the design of algorithms
working with CFGs.
Example: The following grammar is in CNF.
S
| AB | BA
AA | a
BB | b
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
Important Result
Theorem (Sipser 2.9) Any context-free language is generated by
a context-free grammar in Chomsky normal form.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
Important Result
Theorem (Sipser 2.9) Any context-free language is generated by
a context-free grammar in Chomsky normal form.
Proof Strategy
The conversion takes place in four stages.
1. Introduce a new start variable. (Why?)
2. Eliminate all -rules: rules of the form A .
3. Eliminate all unit-rules: rules of the form A B.
4. Change the remaining rules so that their right-hand sides
have either one terminal or two variables.
The above operations should be accompanied by appropriate
patching to ensure that the resulting grammar is equivalent to
the original one.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
10
The Proof
Let G = (V, , R, S) be a CFG.
We convert G in four stages into a CFG in CNF.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
11
1. A New Start Variable

Let S0 be a new symbol; S0 6 V and S0 6 .
Let V1 = V {S0 }.
Let R1 = R {S0 S}
Let the resulting grammar be G1 = (V1 , , R1 , S0 ).
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
12
2. No -Rules
Let R2 = R1
For each rule, r R2 , of the form A do
1. Let R2 = R2 {r}.
2. If B uAv R2 , (where u, v (V1 ) and A is a
proper substring of uAv), let R2 = R2 {B uv}
Note: This should be done for each occurrence of A on
the right-hand side of a rule.That is, it should be
repeated for each possible choice of u and v.
3. If B A R2 , then unless B has already been
removed, let R2 = R2 {B }.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
13
3. No Unit-Rules
Let R3 = R2
For each rule, r R3 , of the form A B (where B V ) do
1. Let R3 = R3 {r}
2. For every rule of the form B u R3 (where
u (V1 )+ and u 6 V ), let R3 = R3 {A u}.
3. For every rule of the form B C R3 (where C V ),
then unless A C has already been removed, let
R3 = R3 {A C}.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
14
4a. Proper Form

Let R4 = R3
For each rule, r R3 , of the form A u1 u2 uk
(ui V and k 3) do
1. Let R4 = R4 {r}.
2. Let V4 = V1 {A1 , A2 , . . . , Ak2 } where Ai 6 (V1 ).
3. Let R4 = R4 {A u1 A1 , A1 u2 A2 , . . . , Ak2
uk1 uk }.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
15
4b. Proper Form

For each rule, r R3 , of the form A u1 u2 where u1 or
u2 do
1. Let R4 = R4 {r}.
2. If ui , then
(a) Let V4 = V4 {Ui }, where Ui 6 (V1 ).
(b) Let R4 = R4 {Ui ui }.
(c) Let R4 = R4 {ri }, where ri is the same as r but with ui
replaced by Ui .
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
16
Example
Convert the following grammar G into CNF.
S
ASA | aB
B|S
b|
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
17
Example
Convert the following grammar G into CNF.
S
ASA | aB
B|S
b|
S0
ASA | aB
B|S
b|
G1 :
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
18
Example (Contd)
G2 :
S0
ASA | aB | a
B|S|
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
19
Example (Contd)
G2 :
S0
ASA | aB | a
B|S|
G2 :
S0
ASA | aB | a | SA | AS | S
B|S
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
20
Example (Contd)
G3 :
S0
ASA | aB | a | SA | AS
ASA | aB | a | SA | AS
b | ASA | aB | a | SA | AS
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
21
Example (Contd)
G4 :
S0
AA1 | UB | a | SA | AS
AA1 | UB | a | SA | AS
b | AA1 | UB | a | SA | AS
A1
SA
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
22
Next time
Pushdown Automata.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail
23
Points to take home

Leftmost derivations.
Ambiguity.
Chmosky normal form.
From CFG to CFG in Chomsky normal form.
c
Haythem
O. Ismail

Ambiguity + Chomsky Normal Form: November 11, 2013

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Ambiguity + Chomsky Normal Form: November 11, 2013

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

German University in Cairo, Winter 2013