You're the best. My textbook for Theory of Computation only has one example for a CFG to CNF conversion, and it didn't do a great job at explaining it. Thank you so much! I have a question, though. When the conversion is finished, isn't S redundant? S_0 has the exact same rules except the epsilon, so why have it? S_0 doesn't call it, and it isn't called anywhere else either.
For eliminating epsilon rules, what if B --> epsilon but S --> aBB. Would S be considered a nullable variable or are nullable variables only if it would be like S --> B
By that rule alone, no. However, if there is a *different* rule where you determine that S is nullable, then that's enough. The rule you gave is not enough on its own to determine if S is nullable or not.
Next video! Strings that are not substrings but are subsequences: th-cam.com/video/Ms3zpTbqmBI/w-d-xo.html
amazing work, I told my entire computer science course about you
I am gonna have my exam in 7 hours and this video could´ve not been more helpful thank you so much
Man, I really appreciate you and all the time you've put into this series of videos. You seem like a great guy, I hope everything is well.
Your videos are the difference between barely passing and a 80+%
Keep up the great work!
Thank you! This is so helpful and easy to understand
You're welcome!
thanks for the video, that was really helpful,
you forgot to change the rule U1CU2 with Y4U2 in the Variable B in stage 5
clear explanation, thank you. minor miss: your last step missed replacing U_1C with Y-4 in rule B ->
best video explaining ever ❤❤
You explained this more complicated than it needs to be.
Very helpful comment. 👍 Explain how and why?
Actually I find that compared to other videos this one is the most complete
thank you so much. you really do make theory EASY!!!!
such a great video!
THIS IS GOLD CONTENT
amazing work sir 👏👏👏
Thanks a lot
I finally got it🤩
Thank this was extremely helpful
You're the best. My textbook for Theory of Computation only has one example for a CFG to CNF conversion, and it didn't do a great job at explaining it. Thank you so much! I have a question, though. When the conversion is finished, isn't S redundant? S_0 has the exact same rules except the epsilon, so why have it? S_0 doesn't call it, and it isn't called anywhere else either.
Sipser?
very helpful
You left S0 -> Epsilon. This isnt considered Chomsky as you have to eliminate all epsilons. Is that correct?
I believe CNF has a special rule where the start variable can go to epsilon, but no other variables can
I have a question. When you "eliminate" the unit rules the all S rules become unaccessible from S0. Is that fine?
Well, in this particular example, you don't need that state S0 since there is no state that has S in its RHS.
I guess he was just showing off what we would do if we had any S in the RHS of any state.
For eliminating epsilon rules, what if B --> epsilon but S --> aBB. Would S be considered a nullable variable or are nullable variables only if it would be like S --> B
By that rule alone, no. However, if there is a *different* rule where you determine that S is nullable, then that's enough. The rule you gave is not enough on its own to determine if S is nullable or not.
very clear ..thanks
You're welcome!
thanks sir
I'm buying an IPad.
great
solved
You should replace my professor
ts od asf work