Let $G$ be a finite state automaton (FSA) with transfer function $\delta(\cdot,\cdot)$ and initial state $q_0$. Suppose also $\Sigma_{G}$ represents its alphabet. Assume that its closed behavior is a set of strings defined as:
$L(G) := \{s \in \Sigma_{G}|\delta(q_0,s) \text{ is defined in }G\}$
Now, consider two particular FSA $G_1$ and $G_2$ such that $\Sigma_{G_{1}} \subseteq \Sigma_{G_{2}}$. Clearly, then we clearly have $\Sigma_{G_{1}}^{*} \subseteq \Sigma_{G_{2}}^{*}$. I'm wondering whether or not we necessarily
conclude that $L(G_{1}) \subseteq L(G_{2})$.
To me, it's not always true. Am I right?
Here is a simple example to contradict it:
in which $\Sigma_{G_{1}}^{*} \subseteq \Sigma_{G_{2}}^{*}$, but $L(G_{1}) \supseteq L(G_{2})$.
silly
exercise since this issue is raised in the case of a research problem about supervisory control of discrete-event systems. As well, as I noted in the question, I have a contrapositive example, and just wanted to make sure there is no fallacy in the resulting conclusion. $\endgroup$