Learning Erasing Equal-Length Relational Pattern Languages in the Limit from Positive Data over Binary Alphabets

Pattern languages are a classical model in formal language theory and algorithmic learning theory. This note formulates the problem of computing the inclusion depth of a pattern language: the length of the longest strict inclusion chain from the universal pattern language to the language generated by a given pattern. Inclusion depth captures the mind-change complexity of pattern identification from positive data. The central open question is whether the inclusion depth ID_Sigma(p) is computable for every pattern p over every finite alphabet Sigma with at least two symbols, and whether it is computable in polynomial time. A simple conjectured formula, ID_Sigma(p) = 2|p| - #var(p) - 1, would imply a linear-time algorithm. The problem connects pattern language inclusion, combinatorics on words, language identification in the limit, and mind-change-bounded learning.

We study language generation in the limit under bounded memory. In this task, a learner observes examples from an unknown target language one at a time and must eventually output only new valid examples. Prior work assumes access to the entire history, a strong assumption since realistic algorithms retain limited past information. Classical work in learning theory shows memory constraints dramatically alter learnability; we extend this to language generation. First, we study memoryless generators. Under a mild enumeration restriction, every countable collection of infinite languages remains generable without memory. Without this restriction, we exactly characterize when memoryless generation is possible. For finite collections, we characterize the optimal minimax density achievable by memoryless generators -- the best density guaranteed against any collection of a given size. This combinatorial bound relies on Sperner's theorem and symmetric chain decompositions. We further show that a sliding window of the last $W$ examples does not improve this worst-case density, whereas allowing it to store $b$ adaptively chosen past examples improves the achievable density for every $b \geq 1$. Finally, we revisit identification in the limit, where the learner must converge to a single correct hypothesis for the target language. We focus on its incremental variant, where the learner remembers only its previous guess. Here, although exact identification fails on a collection of just three languages, a mild relaxation requiring convergence to an ``approximate'' version of the target is achievable for every finite collection. These results show bounded memory affects these tasks differently: generation remains achievable for every countable collection, while density and identification are confined to finite collections, with guarantees weakening as the collection grows.

Language models, as multi-task learners, acquire a wide range of abilities during training. A fundamental question is how much task-specific data is needed to learn a given task. Answering this for natural language is difficult: tasks are hard to delineate and can confound one another. To rigorously investigate the relationship between data frequency and learnability, we turn to a controlled setting using formal languages induced from probabilistic finite automata. These serve as a methodological testbed to demonstrate that standard correlational evaluation practices are inherently flawed. To enable causal analysis, we introduce the binning semiring, an algebraic object that lets us control how often a targeted property occurs in a sampled corpus. We formulate the experimental pipeline as a causal graphical model and derive decomposed Kullback-Leibler divergence metrics to measure the learnability of specific sub-tasks. Our experiments show that evaluating learnability without causal intervention leads to incorrect conclusions due to confounders in correlational analysis, and serve as a warning about correlational pitfalls in natural-language settings.