The complexity of learning SUBSEQ(A)

Journal of Symbolic Logic 74 (3):939-975 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Higman essentially showed that if A is any language then SUBSEQ(A) is regular, where SUBSEQ(A) is the language of all subsequences of strings in A. Let s1, s2, s3, . . . be the standard lexicographic enumeration of all strings over some finite alphabet. We consider the following inductive inference problem: given A(s1), A(s2), A(s3), . . . . learn, in the limit, a DFA for SUBSEQU). We consider this model of learning and the variants of it that are usually studied in Inductive Inference: anomalies, mind-changes, teams, and combinations thereof. This paper is a significant revision and expansion of an earlier conference version [10]

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 105,170

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-12

Downloads
34 (#739,107)

6 months
6 (#731,838)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations