1999
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4612-1544-8_22
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Number Theory and Formal Languages

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our main result gives a positive answer to a conjecture of Shallit [32]. Actually, we will prove a quantitative version of Theorem 2.1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 69%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our main result gives a positive answer to a conjecture of Shallit [32]. Actually, we will prove a quantitative version of Theorem 2.1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…This uses some of the ideas in [3,6] together with classical techniques from Diophantine approximation and a careful combinatorial study of automatic sequences. In particular, we will prove that no Liouville number can be generated by a finite automaton; a result conjectured by Shallit [32]. Actually our approach is much more precise and it will provide an explicit general upper bound for the irrationality measure of any automatic real number.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…Roth's theorem built on work of Liouville [Lio44], who showed that if ξ is an algebraic number of degree d over Q, then µ(ξ) ≤ d. Using this fact, Liouville produced the first examples of transcendental numbers by constructing real numbers with infinite irrationality exponent; numbers with infinite irrationality exponent are now called Liouville numbers in his honour. Towards classifying irrationality exponents of automatic numbers as well as settling a conjecture of Shallit [Sha99], Adamczewski and Cassaigne [AC06] proved that a Liouville number cannot be generated by a finite automaton.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally we propose the following problem related to the discussion after Theorem 7.5. This is an analogue of a conjecture of Shallit [34] that was settled in [5]. Problem 8.9.…”
Section: Diophantine Exponents Of D-bonacci Wordsmentioning
confidence: 87%