Advertisement

Acta Informatica

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 73–130 | Cite as

Fairness of Actions in System Computations

  • F. CorradiniEmail author
  • M. R. Di Berardini
  • W. Vogler
Original Article

Abstract

This paper contrasts two important features of parallel system computations: fairness and timing. The study is carried out at a specification system level by resorting to a well-known process description language. The language is extended with labels which allow to filter out those process executions that are not (weakly) fair [as in Costa and Stirling (Acta Inf. 21:417–441, 1984) and in Costa and Stirling (Inf. Comput. 73:207–244, 1987)], and with upper time bounds for the process activities (as in Corradini et al. Acta Inf. 38:735–792, 2002). We show that fairness and timing are closely related. Two main results are stated. First, we show that each everlasting (or non-Zeno) timed process execution is fair. Second, we provide a characterization for fair executions of untimed processes in terms of timed process executions. This results in a finite representation of fair executions using regular expressions.

Keywords

Induction Hypothesis Operational Semantic System Computation Operational Rule Execution Sequence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bihler E., Vogler W. Efficiency of token-passing MUTEX-solutions— some experiments. In: Desel, J. et al. (eds.) Applications and Theory of Petri Nets 1998, Lect. Notes Comp. Sci. 1420, pp. 185–204, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brookes, S. Traces, pomsets, fairness and full abstractions for communicating processes. In: Concur’02, Lect. Notes Comp. Sci. 2421, pp 466-482. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Corradini, F., Di Berardini, M.R., Vogler, W. PAFAS at work: comparing the worst-case efficiency of three buffer implementations. In: Proceedings of 2nd Asia-Pacific Conference on Quality Software, APAQS 2001, pp. 231–240, IEEE, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Corradini, F., Di BerardiniM, M.R., Vogler, W. Relating fairness and timing in process algebras. In: Concur’03, Lect. Notes Comp. Sci. 2761, pp. 446–460. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corradini, F., Di Berardini, M.R.., Vogler, W. Fairness of components in system computations. In: Proceedins of 11th International Workshop on Expressiveness in Concurrency, Express’04, London, August 2004. A full version of this paper with the same title appeared as Technical Report 2005-3, at http://www.informatik.uni-augsburg.de/skripts/techreportsGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corradini F., Vogler W., Jenner L. (2002) Comparing the worst-case efficiency of asynchronous systems with PAFAS. Acta Inf. 38, 735–792zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Costa G., Stirling C. (1984) A fair calculus of communicating systems. Acta Inf. 21, 417–441zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Costa G., Stirling C. (1987) Weak and strong fairness in CCS. Inf. Comput. 73, 207–244zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Nicola R., Hennessy M.C.B. (1984) Testing equivalence for processes. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 34, 83–133zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoare C.A.R. (1985) Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffszbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jenner, L., Vogler, W. Comparing the efficiency of asynchronous systems. In: Proceedings of AMAST Workshop on Real-Time and Probabilistic Systems, LNCS 1601, pp 172–191 (1999). Modified full version as [6]Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jenner L., Vogler W. (2001) Fast asynchronous systems in dense time. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 254, 379–422zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lynch N. (1996) Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscozbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Milner R. (1989) Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffszbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vogler, W. Efficiency of asynchronous systems and read arcs in petri nets. In: Icalp’97, Lect. Notes Comp. Sci. 1256, pp. 538–548, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vogler W. (2002) Efficiency of asynchronous systems, read arcs, and the MUTEX-problem. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 275, 589–631zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vogler, W. Modular construction and partial order semantics of petri nets. Lect. Notes Comp. Sci. 625, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (1992)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Matematica e InformaticaUniversità di CamerinoCamerinoItaly
  2. 2.Institut für InformatikUniversität AugsburgAugsburgGermany

Personalised recommendations