Formal Aspects of Computing

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 421–449 | Cite as

A CSP model with flexible parallel termination semantics

  • Paul Howells
  • Mark d’Inverno
Original Article


In the original failure-divergence semantic model for Communicating Sequential Processes (CSP), the incomplete treatment of successful process termination, and in particular parallel termination, permitted unnatural processes to be defined. In response to these problems, a number of different solutions have been proposed by various authors since the original failure-divergence model was developed by Hoare, Brookes and Roscoe. This paper presents an alternative solution to this problem, which is both closer to the original semantic model and provides greater flexibility over the type of parallel termination semantics available in CSP.


Concurrency CSP Termination 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. AH92.
    Aceto L, Hennessy M (1992) Termination, deadlock, and divergence. J ACM 39(1): 147–187zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. BHR85.
    Brookes SD, Hoare CAR, Roscoe AW (1985) A theory of communicating sequential processes. J ACM 31(7)Google Scholar
  3. BR85.
    Brookes SD, Roscoe AW (1985) An improved failures model for communicating sequential processes. In: Proceedings of Pittsburgh Seminar on Concurrency, LNCS , vol 197. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 281–305Google Scholar
  4. Bro83.
    Brookes SD (1983) A model for communicating sequential processes. Ph.D. Thesis, Oxford University, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. BW90.
    Baeten JCM, Weijland WP (1990) Process algebra. Cambridge tracts in theoretical computer science, vol 18. Cambridge University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. CW06.
    Cavalcanti ALC,Woodcock JCP (2006) A tutorial introduction to CSP in unifying theories of programming. In: Refinement techniques in software engineering. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3167. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 220–268Google Scholar
  7. Dav93.
    Davies J (1993) Specification and proof in Real-Time systems. Cambridge University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. DS89.
    Davies J, Schneider S (1989) An introduction to timed CSP. Technical monograph PRG-75, Programming Research Group. Oxford University, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. DS92.
    Davies J, Schneider S (1992) A brief history of timed CSP. Technical Monograph PRG-96, Programming Research Group. Oxford University, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. FDR03.
    Formal Systems (Europe) Ltd. Failure-divergence refinement: FDR2 Manual. Oxford, UK (2003)Google Scholar
  11. HJ98.
    Hoare CAR, He Jifeng (1998) Unifying Theories of Programming. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoa85.
    Hoare CAR (1985) Communicating sequential processes. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffszbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. How05.
    Howells P (2005) Communicating sequential processes with flexibile parallel termination semantics. Ph.D. Thesis, University of WestminsterGoogle Scholar
  14. Mil89.
    Milner R (1989) Communication and concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffszbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Ree88.
    Reed GM (1988) A Uniform Mathematical Theory of Distributed Computing. Ph.D. thesis, Oxford University, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Ree90.
    Reed GM (1990) A hierarchy of domains for Real-time distributed computing. In: Proceedings of 5th workshop on mathematical foundations of programming language semantics, LNCS 442. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 80–128Google Scholar
  17. Ros92.
    Roscoe AW (1992) An alternative order for the failures model. J Logic Comput 2(5): 557–577zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Ros98.
    Roscoe AW (1998) The theory and practice of concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  19. RR96.
    Reed GM, Roscoe AW (1996) The timed failures-stability model for CSP. Technical monograph PRG-119, Programming Research Group. Oxford University, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Sch90.
    Schneider S (1990) Correctness and communication in Real-time systems. Technical monograph PRG-84, Programming Research Group. Oxford University, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Sto77.
    Stoy JE (1977) Denotational semantics: the Scott-Strachey approach to programming language theory. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. TW97.
    Tej H, Wolff B (1997) A corrected Failure-Divergence model for CSP in Isabelle/HOL. In: Proceedings of the FME ’97—Industrial Applications and Strengthened Foundations of Formal Methods, LNCS , vol 1313. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© British Computer Society 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of InformaticsUniversity of WestminsterLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Computing, GoldsmithsUniversity of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations