A language can be either Turing recognizable or decidable, but it cannot be both. This is due to the fundamental differences between these two concepts in the field of computational complexity theory.
To understand why a language cannot be both Turing recognizable and decidable, we need to first define what these terms mean. A language is said to be Turing recognizable if there exists a Turing machine that can accept any string in the language and either halt or loop indefinitely on any string not in the language. In other words, a Turing recognizable language can be recognized by a Turing machine that may not necessarily terminate on inputs that are not in the language.
On the other hand, a language is said to be decidable if there exists a Turing machine that can accept any string in the language and halt on any string not in the language. In other words, a decidable language can be recognized by a Turing machine that always terminates on any input, regardless of whether it is in the language or not.
Now, let's consider the relationship between these two concepts. If a language is decidable, it means that there exists a Turing machine that will always halt on any input. This implies that the language is also Turing recognizable, since the Turing machine can simply accept any string in the language and halt on any string not in the language. Therefore, every decidable language is also Turing recognizable.
However, the converse is not true. Not every Turing recognizable language is decidable. To see why, let's consider an example. The language L = {<M> | M is a Turing machine that halts on input ε} is Turing recognizable but not decidable. We can construct a Turing machine that recognizes this language by simulating the behavior of the input Turing machine M on input ε. If M halts, the recognizing Turing machine also halts and accepts; otherwise, it loops indefinitely. This shows that L is Turing recognizable. However, there is no Turing machine that can decide L, since the halting problem (determining whether an arbitrary Turing machine halts on a given input) is undecidable. Therefore, L is an example of a Turing recognizable language that is not decidable.
A language can be either Turing recognizable or decidable, but not both. A decidable language is always Turing recognizable, but a Turing recognizable language may or may not be decidable. The distinction lies in the ability of a Turing machine to always halt on any input, which is the defining characteristic of a decidable language.
Other recent questions and answers regarding Decidability:
- Can a tape be limited to the size of the input (which is equivalent to the head of the turing machine being limited to move beyond the input of the TM tape)?
- What does it mean for different variations of Turing Machines to be equivalent in computing capability?
- Can a turing recognizable language form a subset of decidable language?
- Is the halting problem of a Turing machine decidable?
- If we have two TMs that describe a decidable language is the equivalence question still undecidable?
- How does the acceptance problem for linear bounded automata differ from that of Turing machines?
- Give an example of a problem that can be decided by a linear bounded automaton.
- Explain the concept of decidability in the context of linear bounded automata.
- How does the size of the tape in linear bounded automata affect the number of distinct configurations?
- What is the main difference between linear bounded automata and Turing machines?
View more questions and answers in Decidability