A CASE STUDY ON TEACHING TECHNIQUES FOR
AUTOMATA THEORY
SAURABH KUMAR JHA TULIKA SHIVANI VIDHI AGARWAL
18BCE0197 18BCE2409
I.ABSTRACT
Theory of computation has great significance
in the Computer science curriculum and plays
an importance in field of compiler design, AI
and so on. It encompasses concept
pertaining to formal languages and the
computational model sufficiently powerful to
decide each set of language.[4]In this paper,
we highlight the difficulty faced by
undergraduate students in understanding
various concepts of automata theory such as
regular languages, Pumping Lemma, Turing
machine and Grammars based on different
surveys.[2] Students do not find these
courses interesting and have difficulty in
grasping the different concepts. We have also
dealt with various techniques to facilitate
teaching the concepts to the students in a
better way. The main aim of the proposed
strategies is to promote a more significant
learning of several important FLAT topics.
KEY WORDS:
Theory, computation, significance, Computer
science, curriculum, regular language, finite
automator,Emulator,Javatoolkit,undergraduat
e,students, concepts,
difficulty ,enhancements capabilities, previous
tools, FLAT
II.INTRODUCTION:
The 3 basic ideas in Computer Science are
the mathematical narrative of computational
networks, the constraints of mechanical
computation, and the formal description of
languages. The aim of Theory of
Computation is to develop formal
18BCE2190
mathematical models of computation
that mirror real-world computers. Formal
Languages and Automata (FLA) is one
among the core parts of
the undergraduate Computer
Science program however is
commonly viewed as
a tough subject because it demands a
robust mathematical foundation.[5]


For university students, automata theory is
sometimes introduce in an abstract
manner using mathematical notions. For
kids in K-12,
such associate approach simply discourages
them. Thus, the matter is a how to introduce
automata to them in a simple manner. To
handle this downside, the preceding
studies demonstrated appropriate approache
s, most using simulations and/or games in
which automata are incorporated in an
exceedingly natural approach. These findings
indicate that both Automata theory and CSE
should be introduced early to the K-12
children.[8]There are two main reasons for
the difficulties found in
courses regarding AutomataTheory. The
primary reason is that such courses need a
l o t
of previous knowledge in arithmetic than othe
r courses in Computer Science. The second
reason is that students don't have a
feedback while operating with non-
interactive issues.
The difficulties may be decreased by the
employment of a
toolkit, like Language Emulator, that permits s
tudents to find out Automata Theory
interactively. It is important for college
students to learn about Automata
theory because it forms the basis for
several theoretical Computer
Science topics like algorithms, programming,
formal languages, process complexity, model
theory, logic circuits, and coding theory.
[ Carlos I. Chesñevar, Maria P. González, Ana G.
Maguitman. Didactic strategies for promoting
significant learning in formal languages and
automata theory. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36, 3
(June 2004), 7-11]
know the ideas of Automata Theory.
The software system permits the
manipulation of regular expressions, regular
grammars, deterministic finite automata,
nondeterministic finite automata with
and without lambda transitions, and Moore
and Mealy machines.[10]

III. LITERATURE SURVEY ON LEARNING

DIFFICULTIES:
The purpose of this paper is to provide a
straightforward guide for instructors to
elucidate Automata theory concepts so as to
III a. REGULAR LANGUAGES:
objectify learner’s grip on
This section focuses on the difficulties
basic process constructs, formulations of
experienced by scholar in understanding
techniques and logical arguments, to
regular languages, transducers, context-free
encourage them to understand and apply this
languages , Pumping lemma , Turing
information in varied applied
machine. The main difficulty that students
science branches.This paper is aimed at
experienced in converting NFAs to DFAs was
facilitating students tackle the
dealing with epsilon transitions. This is due
obstacles concerned in learning the basics of
to lack of problem–solving skills which need
Theory of Computation particularly Automata
to be further developed. Students did not
Theory concepts. There is a course in a
find difficulties with converting regular
German secondary education school
expressions to NFAs. However, converting
where the
NFAs to regular expressions was not an easy
flipped classroom technique was accustomed
task for the students and they made errors
to teach basics of automata theory.[3] The
when applying the conversion algorithm. The
results of the
main difficulty with regular grammars was
ultimate course test were good and a
erecting grammars. Some of the students
brief form filled by the scholars suggests
were confused about left-linear and right-
interest of the students in this method of
linear grammars.[5]
teaching.

It is observed that students face some

In this paper, we tend to describe a group of
tools we've developed for experimenting
with several ideas in Automata Theory.
JFLAP is a popular open-source software tool
used in Formal Languages and Automata
courses. JFLAP is for experimenting with
automata, pushdown automata and
Turing machines; LLparse and
LRparse are for experimenting with top-
down and bottom-up parsing; Pˆat´e is each a
brute force program for restricted and
unrestricted synchronic grammers and
a grammer transformer from a context-free
grammar to CNF; and PumpLemma is a tool
for experimenting with the pumping lemma.
LLparse and LRparse are written in C++ and
X Windows while the remaining written in
Java.Another such tool is Language emulator,
which is used to
assist undergraduate students to
difficulties when studying the Pumping
Lemma and applying it in problem solution.
These are caused by problems in employing
formal reasoning methods and relate mainly
to misinterpreting of the Lemma's condition.
As a result, the Pumping Lemma is often
misunderstood leading to incorrect proofs.
Algebraic characterization of regular
languages is one of the most difficult
components of Automata Theory. This part
majorly covers two topics. First is the Nerod
theorem which provides an algebraic point of
reference for regularity of a language and a
medium for replacing the erection of the
minimal DFA that accepts it. Second is the
minimisation of finite automata. Being rather
abstract, these notion and techniques cause
errors in problem solving.
III b. CONTEXT FREE LANGUAGES:
The main problem experienced by the
students was the construction of context-
free grammars and pushdown automata. The
solutions given by students were partially
correct and contained logical errors. They
also experienced trouble in simplifying
grammars, namely, removal of useless
productions and a recursive start symbol.[5]
However, the conversion of simplified
grammars to Chomsky normal and Greibach
normal form did not pose any problems for
students. It is worth noting that students did
not experience difficulties in converting
context-free grammars to pushdown
automata and vice versa.
I I I c . R E C U R S I V E LY E N U M E R A B L E
LANGUAGES
Students possessed knowledge of Turing
machine acceptors, transducers and the
different types of Turing machines and
understood how they worked.[5] The major
difficulty experienced was constructing of
Turing machines for different problems. This
again can be attributed to a need to further
develop students’ problem-solving skills to a
level that will enable them to dealing with
such problems.
III d. PUMPING LEMMA
Pumping Lemma is learned as one of the
major methods used to prove irregularity of
languages. It has been seen that students
have a lot of trouble in comprehensing and
identifying with this idea. These are brought
about by issues in utilizing formal thinking
strategies, and relate basically to
misconception of the Lemma's conditions
and their need for its rightness.[9] Another
threat is that an understudy may finish the
course and have the option to precisely take
care of standard issues utilizing the Lemma,
however without having built up a fitting
comprehension of fundamental ideas and
nuances.
IV. A STUDY ABOUT THE TOOLS
IV a. JFLAP
We have developed a set of tools written in
Java for experimenting
with concepts in formal languages and
automata theory. JFLAP (Java Formal
Languages and Automata Package)
allows one to construct automata, pushdown
automata and Turing machines, and run
traces on input strings. Pˆat´e
(Parsing And Transforming Engine) contains
two parts for experimenting with grammars,
a brute force parser that shows the
derivation and parse tree for an input string,
and
a transformer for converting a context-free
grammar to CNF through several steps.
PumpLemma allows one to experiment
with the regular pumping lemma. We
describe these tools in the following
sections.[15]
IV b. BRUTE FORCE PARSER
The brute force program is a thoroughgoing
search parser for restricted and unrestricted
grammars. Given synchronic linguistics andd
an input string, the parser builds a derivation
tree during a breadth-first way. Every node
within the tree has a string of words kind and
the product range used to get from its parent
node to itself. To accelerate the creating of
the deduction tree, the consumer will decide
to allow simply one such hub for every string
of words structured in the tree. Thus, every
new string of words kind generated is first
looked up to envision if the string of words
kind already exists and if so it's no other. For
restricted grammars, further pruning of
nodes is accomplished by deleting nodes
whose prefix, suffix or substring of terminals
don't match within the input string. Once a
derivation is found, a message indicates the
acceptance of the string and the size of the
derivation tree.[8]The user will opt to show
the particular derivation in textual format or
within the kind of a breakdown tree (for
restricted grammars only). If all nodes within
the derivation tree are exhausted and the
string isn't found, a message indicates that
the string isn't within the language of the
synchronic linguistics. It is an educational
tool to experiment with tiny grammars and
tiny input strings and works well for many
assignments given to starting
students[10].Obviously, for some strings and
grammars, the parsing could take a
protracted time. For big sizes of the
derivation tree, messages seem to indicate
to the user the dimensions of the tree and
asking if they want to continue. The user may
pause the parsing at any time for similar info.
V. RELATED WORK:
Several supplementary tools are developed
for analysing with alternative facets of
automata. Automata developed on
Mathematica permits one to experiment with
finite automata (FA), within which one enters
AN solfa syllable within the matter formal
notation, a 5-tuple, and may then
mechanically generate a listing of strings
within the language, convert AN NFA to a
DFA and lots of alternative helpful
operations. Hypercard Automata [15]
Simulation permits one to enter AN solfa
syllable within the tabular format. Alan
Mathison Turing’s World permits one to
experiment with many various styles of
Turing Machines in a very graphical format,
as well as building computing machine
modules. Firstly, the method that students
follow as they conceive to solve issues will
probably reveal misunderstanding of
underlying ideas, or inefficient methods for
reaching an answer. We tend to so equip
JFLAP with the mouldability to record the
method within which students solve observe
problems: however long they linger over the
particular queries, however typically they
invoke machine-controlled hints, however
they modify their answer in response to
those hints etc.
VI. CONCLUSION
We have mentioned a set of tutorial tools for
ex_ permeant with automata , grammar and
parsing for the formal language course.Our
immediate focus areas are: (1) gathering
feedback from users of this technique
(instructors and students) concerning the
options we've enforced, and taking their
suggestions on board for revisions; (2)
gathering a enough quantity of combination
information on student traces to envision
what forms of analysis of this information
would be helpful, associate degreed building
such an analysis tool; (3) doing a careful
comparison between our planned
methodology making correctness
specifications vs.
Future works embrace the drawing of states
and transitions, employing a graphical input,
and therefore the analysis of latest
techniques that may build the understanding
of the automata theory easier. We have
developed JFLAP to review four styles of
automata and area unit presently enhancing
the tool to assist within the study of
theorems associated with these automata.
Our future thought may be a complete
analysis of the planned methodology by a
comparative analysis of the planned
methodology with various solutions of the
list.
VII. REFERENCES
[1] Carlos I. Chesñevar, Maria P. González, Ana G.
Maguitman. Didactic strategies for promoting
significant learning in formal languages and
automata theory. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36, 3
(June 2004), 7-11
[2] David Basin,Ernst-Ruediger Olderog and Paul
E. Sevinc. Specifying and Analyzing Security
Automata using CSP-OZ,2003.
[3] M. Brown, ZEUS: A System for algorithm
animation and multi-view editing.
Proceedings of the IEEE 1991 Workshop on
Visual Languages, p. 4-9, Kobe, Japan,
Oct. 1991.
[4] . J. E. Hopcroft, R. Motwani, and J. D. Ullman.
Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages,
and Computation. Pearson Education, 2001.
[5] P. Gloor, AACE - Algorithm Animation for
Computer Science Education, IEEE
Workshop on Visual Languages,
p. 25-31, 1992.
[6] L. D. Fink. Creating Significant Learning
Experiences : An Integrated Approach to
Designing College Courses. Jossey-Bass,
2003.
[7] S. H. Roger, J. Lim, and S. Reading,
“Increasing interaction and support in the
formal languages and automata theory
course”, Innovation and Technology in
Computer Science Education (ITiCSE2007),
pp. 58-62, 2007.
[8] V. S. Shekhar, A. Agarwalla, A. Agarwal,
Nitish B., and V. Kumar, “Enhancing JFLAP
with automata construction problems and
automated feedback”, Proc. of the 7th Intl.

Conf. on Contemporary Computing (IC3

2014), to appear.
[9] F. N. Koumboulis ,D. G. Fragkoulis ,N. D.
Kouvakas ,Automata-Based Programming for the
Development of a Web based Application
-A Case Study,2008.
[10] Susan H. Rodger,Eric Gramond,
JFLAP: An Aid to Studying Theorems in
Automata Theory
[12] C. Fischer. CSP-OZ: A combination of
Object-Z and CSP. In H. Bowman and J.
Derrick, editors, Formal
Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed
Systems, volume 2, pages 423–438.
Chapman & Hall, 1997.
[13] C. Fischer. Combination and
Implementation of Processes and Data: From
CSP-OZ to Java. PhD thesis, Bericht Nr.
2/2000, University of Oldenburg, April 2000.
[14] C. Fischer and H. Wehrheim. Model-
checking CSP-OZ
specifications with FDR. In K. Araki, A.
Galloway,
and K. Taguchi, editors, Integrated Formal
Methods,
pages 315–334. Springer, 1999.
[15] Anna O. Bilska, Kenneth H. Leider,
Magdalena Procopiuc, Octavian Procopiuc,

Susan H. Rodger, Jason R. Salemme and Edwin

Tsang A Collection of Tools for Making Automata
Theory and Formal Languages Come Alive. 2006

Paper id-10140145