{"title":"对于大小为8的实例,无限邮政通信问题的不可判定性","authors":"Jing Dong, Qinghui Liu","doi":"10.1051/ita/2012015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The infinite Post Correspondence Problem ( ω PCP) was shown to be undecidable by Ruohonen (1985) in general. Blondel and Canterini [ Theory Comput. Syst. 36 (2003) 231–245] showed that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 105, Halava and Harju [ RAIRO–Theor. Inf. Appl. 40 (2006) 551–557] showed that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 9. By designing a special coding, we delete a letter from Halava and Harju’s construction. So we prove that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 8.","PeriodicalId":438841,"journal":{"name":"RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl.","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Undecidability of infinite post correspondence problem for instances of size 8\",\"authors\":\"Jing Dong, Qinghui Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1051/ita/2012015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The infinite Post Correspondence Problem ( ω PCP) was shown to be undecidable by Ruohonen (1985) in general. Blondel and Canterini [ Theory Comput. Syst. 36 (2003) 231–245] showed that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 105, Halava and Harju [ RAIRO–Theor. Inf. Appl. 40 (2006) 551–557] showed that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 9. By designing a special coding, we delete a letter from Halava and Harju’s construction. So we prove that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 8.\",\"PeriodicalId\":438841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl.\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1051/ita/2012015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1051/ita/2012015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Undecidability of infinite post correspondence problem for instances of size 8
The infinite Post Correspondence Problem ( ω PCP) was shown to be undecidable by Ruohonen (1985) in general. Blondel and Canterini [ Theory Comput. Syst. 36 (2003) 231–245] showed that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 105, Halava and Harju [ RAIRO–Theor. Inf. Appl. 40 (2006) 551–557] showed that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 9. By designing a special coding, we delete a letter from Halava and Harju’s construction. So we prove that ω PCP is undecidable for domain alphabets of size 8.