Jean Berstel
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Jean Berstel has a total of 15 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Christophe Reutenauer
Université du Québec í Montréal, Canada
35 shared publications- Dominique Perrin
Université Paris Est
16 shared publications - Clelia De Felice
Dipartimento di Informatica, Università degli Studi di Salerno, Fisciano (SA), Italy
2 shared publications - Luc Boasson
Université Denis-Diderot
2 shared publications Dominique Perrin
LIGM
1 shared publication- Dominique Perrin
Institut Gaspard-Monge, Universite de Marne-la-Vallée, France
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 1 October 2012
- Published by Elsevier in European Journal of Combinatorics
- Vol. 33 (7) , 1386-1401
Recent results on syntactic groups of prefix codes
- 1 October 2012
- Published by Elsevier in European Journal of Combinatorics
- Vol. 33 (7) , 1386-1401
Recent results on syntactic groups of prefix codes
- Open Access
Symbolic dynamics
This chapter presents some of the links between automata theory and symbolic dynamics. The emphasis is on two particular points. The first one is the interplay between some particular classes of automata, such as local automata and results on embeddings of shifts of finite type. The second one is the connection between syntactic semigroups and the classification of sofic shifts up to conjugacy.
Open AccessSymbolic dynamics
This chapter presents some of the links between automata theory and symbolic dynamics. The emphasis is on two particular points. The first one is the interplay between some particular classes of automata, such as local automata and results on embeddings of shifts of finite type. The second one is the connection between syntactic semigroups and the classification of sofic shifts up to conjugacy.
- Open Access
Minimization of Automata
This chapter is concerned with the design and analysis of algorithms for minimizing finite automata. Getting a minimal automaton is a fundamental issue in the use and implementation of finite automata tools in frameworks like text processing, image analysis, linguistic computer science, and many other applications. There are two main families of minimization algorithms. The first by a sequence of refinements of a partition of the set of states, the second by a sequence of fusions or merges of states. Hopcroft's and Moore's algorithms belong to the first family, the linear-time minimization of acyclic automata of Revuz belongs to the second family. One of our studies is upon the comparison of the nature of Moore's and Hopcroft's algorithms. This gives some new insight in both algorithms. As we shall see, these algorithms are quite different both in behavior and in complexity. In particular, we show that it is not possible to simulate the computations of one of the algorithm by the other. We describe the minimization algorithm by fusion for so-called local automata. A special case of minimization is the construction o minimal automata for finite sets. We consider briefly this case, and in particular describe incremental algorithms. Finally, we consider the case of updating a minimal automaton when a word is added or removed from the set it recognizes.
Open AccessMinimization of Automata
This chapter is concerned with the design and analysis of algorithms for minimizing finite automata. Getting a minimal automaton is a fundamental issue in the use and implementation of finite automata tools in frameworks like text processing, image analysis, linguistic computer science, and many other applications. There are two main families of minimization algorithms. The first by a sequence of refinements of a partition of the set of states, the second by a sequence of fusions or merges of states. Hopcroft's and Moore's algorithms belong to the first family, the linear-time minimization of acyclic automata of Revuz belongs to the second family. One of our studies is upon the comparison of the nature of Moore's and Hopcroft's algorithms. This gives some new insight in both algorithms. As we shall see, these algorithms are quite different both in behavior and in complexity. In particular, we show that it is not possible to simulate the computations of one of the algorithm by the other. We describe the minimization algorithm by fusion for so-called local automata. A special case of minimization is the construction o minimal automata for finite sets. We consider briefly this case, and in particular describe incremental algorithms. Finally, we consider the case of updating a minimal automaton when a word is added or removed from the set it recognizes.
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 234-241
References
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 233
Open problems and conjectures
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 199-216
Codes and formal series
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 183-198
Noncommutative polynomials
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 163-182
Matrix semigroups and applications
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 163-182
Matrix semigroups and applications
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 143-160
Positive series in one variable
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 143-160
Positive series in one variable
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 83-104
Automatic sequences and a lgebraic series
- 14 October 2010
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 83-104
Automatic sequences and a lgebraic series