Context-free language

In formal language theory, a context-free language (CFL) is a language generated by a context-free grammar (CFG).

Context-free languages have many applications in programming languages, in particular, most arithmetic expressions are generated by context-free grammars.

Background

Context-free grammar

Different context-free grammars can generate the same context-free language. Intrinsic properties of the language can be distinguished from extrinsic properties of a particular grammar by comparing multiple grammars that describe the language.

Automata

The set of all context-free languages is identical to the set of languages accepted by pushdown automata, which makes these languages amenable to parsing. Further, for a given CFG, there is a direct way to produce a pushdown automaton for the grammar (and thereby the corresponding language), though going the other way (producing a grammar given an automaton) is not as direct.

Examples

A model context-free language is $L=\{a^{n}b^{n}:n\geq 1\}$, the language of all non-empty even-length strings, the entire first halves of which are a's, and the entire second halves of which are b's. L is generated by the grammar $S\to aSb~|~ab$. This language is not regular. It is accepted by the pushdown automaton $M=(\{q_{0},q_{1},q_{f}\},\{a,b\},\{a,z\},\delta ,q_{0},z,\{q_{f}\})$ where $\delta$ is defined as follows:

${\begin{aligned}\delta (q_{0},a,z)&=(q_{0},az)\\\delta (q_{0},a,a)&=(q_{0},aa)\\\delta (q_{0},b,a)&=(q_{1},\varepsilon )\\\delta (q_{1},b,a)&=(q_{1},\varepsilon )\\\delta (q_{1},\varepsilon ,z)&=(q_{f},\varepsilon )\end{aligned}}$

Unambiguous CFLs are a proper subset of all CFLs: there are inherently ambiguous CFLs. An example of an inherently ambiguous CFL is the union of $\{a^{n}b^{m}c^{m}d^{n}|n,m>0\}$ with $\{a^{n}b^{n}c^{m}d^{m}|n,m>0\}$. This set is context-free, since the union of two context-free languages is always context-free. But there is no way to unambiguously parse strings in the (non-context-free) subset $\{a^{n}b^{n}c^{n}d^{n}|n>0\}$ which is the intersection of these two languages.

Dyck language

The language of all properly matched parentheses is generated by the grammar $S\to SS~|~(S)~|~\varepsilon$.

Properties

Context-free parsing

Main article: Parsing

The context-free nature of the language makes it simple to parse with a pushdown automaton.

Determining an instance of the membership problem; i.e. given a string $w$, determine whether $w\in L(G)$ where $L$ is the language generated by a given grammar $G$; is also known as recognition. Context-free recognition for Chomsky normal form grammars was shown by Leslie G. Valiant to be reducible to boolean matrix multiplication, thus inheriting its complexity upper bound of O(n^2.3728639). Conversely, Lillian Lee has shown O(n^3−ε) boolean matrix multiplication to be reducible to O(n^3−3ε) CFG parsing, thus establishing some kind of lower bound for the latter.

Practical uses of context-free languages require also to produce a derivation tree that exhibits the structure that the grammar associates with the given string. The process of producing this tree is called parsing. Known parsers have a time complexity that is cubic in the size of the string that is parsed.

Formally, the set of all context-free languages is identical to the set of languages accepted by pushdown automata (PDA). Parser algorithms for context-free languages include the CYK algorithm and Earley's Algorithm.

A special subclass of context-free languages are the deterministic context-free languages which are defined as the set of languages accepted by a deterministic pushdown automaton and can be parsed by a LR(k) parser.

See also parsing expression grammar as an alternative approach to grammar and parser.

Closure

Context-free languages are closed under the following operations. That is, if L and P are context-free languages, the following languages are context-free as well:

• the union $L\cup P$ of L and P
• the reversal of L
• the concatenation $L\cdot P$ of L and P
• the Kleene star $L^{*}$ of L
• the image $\varphi (L)$ of L under a homomorphism $\varphi$
• the image $\varphi ^{-1}(L)$ of L under an inverse homomorphism $\varphi ^{-1}$
• the circular shift of L (the language $\{vu:uv\in L\}$)
• the prefix closure of L (the set of all prefixes of strings from L)
• the quotient L/R of L by a regular language R

Nonclosure under intersection, complement, and difference

The context-free languages are not closed under intersection. This can be seen by taking the languages $A=\{a^{n}b^{n}c^{m}\mid m,n\geq 0\}$ and $B=\{a^{m}b^{n}c^{n}\mid m,n\geq 0\}$, which are both context-free. Their intersection is $A\cap B=\{a^{n}b^{n}c^{n}\mid n\geq 0\}$, which can be shown to be non-context-free by the pumping lemma for context-free languages. As a consequence, context-free languages cannot be closed under complementation, as for any languages A and B, their intersection can be expressed by union and complement: $A\cap B={\overline {{\overline {A}}\cup {\overline {B}}}}$. In particular, context-free language cannot be closed under difference, since complement can be expressed by difference: ${\overline {L}}=\Sigma ^{*}\setminus L$.

However, if L is a context-free language and D is a regular language then both their intersection $L\cap D$ and their difference $L\setminus D$ are context-free languages.

Decidability

In formal language theory, questions about regular languages are usually decidable, but ones about context-free languages are often not. It is decidable whether such a language is finite, but not whether it contains every possible string, is regular, is unambiguous, or is equivalent to a language with a different grammar.

The following problems are undecidable for arbitrarily given context-free grammars A and B:

• Equivalence: is $L(A)=L(B)$?
• Disjointness: is $L(A)\cap L(B)=\emptyset$ ? However, the intersection of a context-free language and a regular language is context-free, hence the variant of the problem where B is a regular grammar is decidable (see "Emptiness" below).
• Containment: is $L(A)\subseteq L(B)$ ? Again, the variant of the problem where B is a regular grammar is decidable, while that where A is regular is generally not.
• Universality: is $L(A)=\Sigma ^{*}$ ?

The following problems are decidable for arbitrary context-free languages:

• Emptiness: Given a context-free grammar A, is $L(A)=\emptyset$ ?
• Finiteness: Given a context-free grammar A, is $L(A)$ finite?
• Membership: Given a context-free grammar G, and a word $w$, does $w\in L(G)$ ? Efficient polynomial-time algorithms for the membership problem are the CYK algorithm and Earley's Algorithm.

According to Hopcroft, Motwani, Ullman (2003), many of the fundamental closure and (un)decidability properties of context-free languages were shown in the 1961 paper of Bar-Hillel, Perles, and Shamir

Languages that are not context-free

The set $\{a^{n}b^{n}c^{n}d^{n}|n>0\}$ is a context-sensitive language, but there does not exist a context-free grammar generating this language. So there exist context-sensitive languages which are not context-free. To prove that a given language is not context-free, one may employ the pumping lemma for context-free languages or a number of other methods, such as Ogden's lemma or Parikh's theorem.

References

• Seymour Ginsburg (1966). The Mathematical Theory of Context-Free Languages. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
• Hopcroft, John E.; Ullman, Jeffrey D. (1979). Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation (1st ed.). Addison-Wesley.
• Arto Salomaa (1973). Formal Languages. ACM Monograph Series.
• Michael Sipser (1997). Introduction to the Theory of Computation. PWS Publishing. ISBN 0-534-94728-X. Chapter 2: Context-Free Languages, pp. 91–122.
• Jean-Michel Autebert, Jean Berstel, Luc Boasson, Context-Free Languages and Push-Down Automata, in: G. Rozenberg, A. Salomaa (eds.), Handbook of Formal Languages, Vol. 1, Springer-Verlag, 1997, 111-174.