To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
An infinite sequence $\alpha $ over an alphabet $\Sigma $ is $\mu $-distributed with respect to a probability map $\mu $ if, for every finite string w, the limiting frequency of w in $\alpha $ exists and equals $\mu (w)$. We prove the following result for any finite or countably infinite alphabet $\Sigma $: every finite-state selector over $\Sigma $ selects a $\mu $-distributed sequence from every $\mu $-distributed sequence if and only if$\mu $ is induced by a Bernoulli distribution on $\Sigma $, that is, a probability distribution on the alphabet extended to words by taking the product. The primary—and remarkable—consequence of our main result is a complete characterization of the set of probability maps, on finite and infinite alphabets, for which finite-state selection preserves $\mu $-distributedness. As a consequence, the shift-invariant measures $\mu $ on $\Sigma ^{\omega }$, such that any finite-state selector preserves the property of genericity for $\mu $, are exactly the positive Bernoulli measures.
For an extensive range of infinite words, and the associated symbolic dynamical systems, we compute, together with the usual language complexity function counting the finite words, the minimal and maximal complexity functions we get by replacing finite words by finite patterns, or words with holes.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.