Timeline for NFA to DFA final states proof
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 25, 2014 at 16:45 | comment | added | Raphael | What are you really asking? Do you have to prove correctness of the subset construction or do you not understand that proof? What is your problem with the statement? | |
| Jan 25, 2014 at 16:12 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackCompSci/status/427111863273652224 | ||
| Jan 25, 2014 at 14:47 | answer | added | J.-E. Pin | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 25, 2014 at 13:48 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 25, 2014 at 18:20 | |||||
| Jan 25, 2014 at 13:41 | comment | added | Shaull | This is the way the subset-construction is defined. What one needs to prove is that the subset-construction is correct. That is, that it does not change the language. | |
| Jan 25, 2014 at 13:41 | comment | added | user21276 | The property of the NFA-states that are in the DFA states are final states. | |
| Jan 25, 2014 at 13:34 | comment | added | Hendrik Jan | What exactly is the property of the NFA-states that are in a DFA-state? | |
| Jan 25, 2014 at 13:32 | history | asked | user21276 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |