Formal Aspects of Computing

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 417–444 | Cite as

Minimal refinements of specifications in modal and temporal logics

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 42 Downloads

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AL91.
    Abadi M, Lamport L(1991) The existence of refinement mappings. Theor Comput Sci 82(2):253–284MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. BCM+90.
    Burch JR, Clarke EM, McMillan KL, Dill DL, Hwang LJ(1990) Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond. In: Proceedings of the fifth annual IEEE symposium on logic in computer science, IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington pp 1–33Google Scholar
  3. BdRV01.
    Blackburn P, de Rijke M, Venema Y(2001) Modal logic, vol 53 of Cambridge tracts in theoretical computer science. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. BEF93.
    van Benthem J, van Eijck J, Frolova A(1993) Changing preferences. Technical Report CS-93-10, Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  5. BFG+91.
    Bouajjani A, Fernandez JC, Graf S, Rodriguez C, Sifakis J(1991) Safety for branching time semantics. In: Proceedings of the 18th international colloquium on automata, languages and programming, ICALP’91, vol 510 of LNCS, Madrid, Spain. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg Newyork, pp 76–92Google Scholar
  6. BMP97.
    Bezzazi H, Makinson D, Pérez RP(1997) Beyond rational monotony: Some strong non-horn rules for nonmonotonic inference relations. J Logic Comput 7(5):605–631MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. CE81.
    Clarke EM, Emerson EA(1981) The design and synthesis of synchronization skeletons using temporal logic. In Workshop on Logics of Programs, vol 131 of LNCS, Yorktown Heights.Springer Berlin Heidelberg Newyork, pp 52–72Google Scholar
  8. CES86.
    Clarke EM, Emerson EA, Sistla AP(1986) Automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 8(2):244–263MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. CGL96.
    Clarke EM, Grumberg O, Long D(1996) Model checking. Nato ASI Series F, vol 152. Springer,Berlin Heidelberg Newyork Marktoberdorf summer schoolGoogle Scholar
  10. Che80.
    Chellas BF(1980) Modal Logic: An introduction. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Dal88.
    Dalal M(1988) Investigations into a theory of knowledge base revision: Preliminary report. In: Proceedings of the 7th national conference on artificial intelligence. St. Paul, Minnesota, pp. 475–479Google Scholar
  12. dR95.
    de Rijke M(1995) Modal model theory. Technical Report CS–R9517, CWI, Amsterdam (1995)Google Scholar
  13. GL94.
    Grumberg O, Long DE(1994) Model checking and modular verification. ACM Tran Program Lang Syst 16(3):843–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gor03.
    Gorogiannis N(2003) Computing minimal changes of models of systems. PhD Thesis, School of Computer Science, University of Birmingham,Google Scholar
  15. GR02.
    Gorogiannis N, Ryan MD(2002) Requirements, specifications and minimal refinement. In: 9th workshop on logic, language, information and computation, vol 67 of electronic notes in theoretical computer science. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  16. Gro88.
    Grove A(1988) Two modelings for theory change. J Philos Logic 17:157–170CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Hal95.
    Halpern JY(1995) The effect of bounding the number of primitive propositions and the depth of nesting on the complexity of modal logic. Artificial Intelligence 75(2):361–372MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. HKR97.
    Henzinger TA, Kupferman O, Rajamani SK(1997) Fair simulation. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on concurrency theory (CONCUR), vol 1243 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer,Berlin Heidelberg Newyork, pp 273–287Google Scholar
  19. HM85.
    Hennessy M, Milner R(1985) Algebraic laws for nondeterminism and concurrency. J ACM 32(1):137–161MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. Hol95.
    Hollenberg M(1995) Hennessy-Milner classes and process algebra. In: Ponse A, de Rijke M, Venema Y (eds), Modal Logic and Process Algebra. pp 187–216. CSLI Publications, 1995.Google Scholar
  21. HR04.
    Huth MR, Ryan MD(2004) Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. KGG99.
    Katz S, Grumberg O, Geist D(1999) Have I written enough properties? - a method of comparison between specification and implementation. In: Conference on correct hardware design and verification methods, pp 280–297Google Scholar
  23. KLM90.
    Kraus S, Lehmann D, Magidor M(1990) Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artif Intell 44:167–207CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. KM89.
    Katsuno H, Mendelzon AO(1989) A unified view of propositional knowledge base updates. In: Proceedings of the eleventh international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Detroit pp 1413–1419Google Scholar
  25. KM91.
    Katsuno H, Mendelzon AO(1991) Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change. Artificial Intelligence 52:263–294MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. KM92.
    Katsuno H, Mendelzon AO(1992) On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Gärdenfors P, (ed) Belief revision, Cambridge Computer Tracts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 183–203Google Scholar
  27. Mai00.
    Maidl M(2000) The common fragment of CTL and LTL. In: Proceedings of the 41th annual symposium on foundations of computer science, pp 643–652Google Scholar
  28. McM93.
    McMillan KL(1993) Symbolic model checking. Kluwer, DordrechtMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Mey91.
    van der Meyden R(1991) A clausal logic for deontic action specification. In: Proceedings of the international logic programming symposium, MIT Press, San Diego, pp 221–238Google Scholar
  30. Mil71.
    Milner R(1971) An algebraic definition of simulation between programs. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international joint conference on artificial intelligence, London, pp 481–489Google Scholar
  31. NDG+.
    North S,Dobkin D, Gansner E, Koutsofios E, Vo K, Woodhull G Graphviz, A suite of tools for visualizing graphs. Can be obtained from http://www.graphviz.orgGoogle Scholar
  32. PMT02.
    Peng H, Mokhtari Y, Tahar S(2002) Environment synthesis for compositional model checking. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer design. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 70–75Google Scholar

Copyright information

© British Computer Society 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ComputingUniversity of the West of EnglandBristolUK
  2. 2.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations