Talk:Finite state transducer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Regular Relations and Closure Properties
The article should mention that finite state transducers correspond to regular relations, which are a language class on their own. The section about "Operations on finite state transducers" is a also a bit misleading (though correct) in this respect. Although there is no notion of the intersection of two FSTs it should be pointed out, that this is due to the fact that the language class of regular relations is not closed under intersection (Proof sketch: the intersection of {(a^n b^m, c^n)} and {a^n b^m, c^m} is {a^n b^n, c^n}. The input language is trivially non-regular). Also, the concept of an FST can be understood to be a recognizer or generator for complex Symbols I x O. Under this conception FSTs _are_ in fact closed under intersection as they do no longer differ from FSAs. FSTs without "feasible pairs" for insertion/deletion can also be intersected. --Reas0n85 21:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Similarity to Literature
Furthermore some formulations in this article are very similar to those in Jurafsky, Daniel, James H. Martin (2000). Speech and Language Processing. Prentice Hall, 71-83. ISBN 0-13-095069-6. --Reas0n85 21:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mealy machines
The concept of FSTs is similar if not equivalent to Mealy machines. Probably the articles should be merged, but as a beginning I have added it to the "see also" section. --Reas0n85 21:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Missing terms in context
- feasible pair
- insertion
- deletion
--Reas0n85 21:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)