1987
DOI: 10.1109/tsmc.1987.6499309
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inference of regular grammars via skeletons

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2004
2004

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In actual fact, Radhakrishnan and Nagaraja [33,34] had already claimed a similar grammatical characterization for TDRL, but they gave no proof. Our grammatical definition of TDRL mainly adds point 3(a) to their definition, but this turns out to be an essential point in the equivalence proof.…”
Section: Terminal Distinguishable Right-linear Languagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In actual fact, Radhakrishnan and Nagaraja [33,34] had already claimed a similar grammatical characterization for TDRL, but they gave no proof. Our grammatical definition of TDRL mainly adds point 3(a) to their definition, but this turns out to be an essential point in the equivalence proof.…”
Section: Terminal Distinguishable Right-linear Languagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a second part of the paper, we discuss questions concerning grammatical inference of these systems. More precisely, we show that PCGSTT whose component grammars are terminal distinguishable right-linear, a notion introduced by Radhakrishnan and Nagaraja in [33,34], are identifiable in the limit if certain data communication information is supplied in addition. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a consequence, the large body of research on inductive inference that originated from Gold's works has concentrated on the problem of finding restricted classes of regular grammars for which learning from positive data is possible. This research has led to the identification of several such classes [Angluin 1982;Radhakrishnan and Nagaraja 1987], which were proven to be identifiable in the limit, and for which unsupervised algorithms were developed and formally proven to be correct.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this approach, tree-like descriptions of the words are given to the inference method. This description usually gives relevant information which is related to the training data, for instance, one of the possible ways the data can be generated [4]- [6]. These inference methods can be modified for inferring tree languages.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%