5CCS2FC2

Academic year 2016-17, Term 2

Tutorial 2

Design of the Turing Machines

1) Describe a TM that decides the following language: L3 = { <A>: A is a DFA that does not accept
any words}
2) Describe a TM that decides the following language: L4 = { <A,B> : A and B are equivalent DFAs
that is, they accept the same language}
a) Same question, but with NFA.

Proofs of undecidability and unrecognizability (we assume that M1 and M2 are

encodings of Turing Machines)

3) Prove that EQTM = { <M1, M2> : L(M1) = L(M2) } is undecidable.

4) Prove that EQTM = { <M1, M2> : L(M1) = L(M2) } is not recognizable. Hint use the following
proof structure:
a) Consider the language ATM = (the language {<M,w> : M accepts w}. We proved in class that
ATM is undecidable. Use this to prove that its complement the language !" is not
recognizable.
b) Reduce !" to EQTM.
5) Prove that the complement of EQTM - the language !" = {<M1, M2> : L(M1) L(M2) } is not
recognizable using similar ideas to (4).

Turing Machines with bounded tape - LBA

Consider the class of Turing Machines with bounded tape called LBA (linear bounded automata).
Definition: an LBA is a Turing Machine that is not allowed to move past the portion of the tape
containing the input. On this portion, an LBA can erase, write, or replace letters.

6) Consider the language ALBA = {<M,w>: M is an LBA that accepts w}. Prove that ALBA is decidable by
describing a Turing Machine (not an LBA) that accepts it. Hint: how many configurations can an
LBA M have on an input of length n?
7) Prove that the language ELBA = { <M>: M is an LBA with an empty language} is not recognizable.