Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

True Concurrency in Models of Asynchronous Circuit Behavior

  • Published:
Formal Methods in System Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the study of asynchronous designs most authors use the interleaving model of concurrency when describing the behavior of a network; this is usually done for simplicity. The interleaving model assumes the behavior of an asynchronous circuit can be adequately represented by allowing only one signal to change at a time. In contrast to this, true concurrency models allow an arbitrary number of simultaneous signal changes. It seems that little effort has been made to determine what effect the choice of model may have on the analysis of a network. In this paper, we attempt to discover the circumstances under which the assumption of single signal changes can be made without affecting the results of circuit analysis. We prove, in a formal network model, that, in the context of delay-insensitivity and semi-modularity, the single change assumption is valid. We also prove that the same is true for a different definition of delay-insensitivity, restricted to deterministic behaviors. Consequently, in these cases, the more complicated true concurrency analysis is not required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. E. Best and R. Devillers, “Interleaving and partial orders in concurrency: A formal comparison,” in M. Wirsing (Ed.), Formal Description of Programming Concepts—III, pp. 299–322. North-Holland, 1987.

  2. E. Best and M. Koutny, “Petri net semantics of priority systems,” Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 96, pp. 175–215, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J.A. Brzozowski, “Delay-insensitivity and ternary simulation,” Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 245, pp. 3–25, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  4. J.A. Brzozowski and C.-J. Seger, Asynchronous Circuits, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J.A. Brzozowski and H. Zhang, “Delay-insensitivity and semi-modularity,” Research Report CS–97–11, Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada, March 1997.

  6. J.A. Brzozowski and H. Zhang, “Delay-insensitivity and semi-modularity,” Formal Methods in System Design, Vol. 16, pp. 191–218, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  7. P. Degano, R. De Nicola, and U. Montanari, “A partial ordering semantics for CCS,” Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 75, pp. 223–262, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  8. D.L. Dill, Trace Theory for Automatic Hierarchical Verification of Speed-Independent Circuits, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J.C. Ebergen, “Translating programs into delay-insensitive circuits,” Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, October 1997. Also, CWI Trace 56, Center for Mathematics and Computer Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1989.

  10. G.L. Ferrari and U. Montanari, “The observation algebra of spatial pomsets,” In CONCUR '91: 2nd International Conference on Concurrency Theory, 1991, pp. 188–202.

  11. V. Gupta, R. Jagadeensan, and V. Saraswat, “Truly concurrent constraint programming,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Concurrency Theory, Pisa, Italy, August 26–29 1996.

  12. C.A.R. Hoare, Communicating Sequential Processes, Prentice-Hall, 1985.

  13. D.A. Huffman, “The synthesis of sequential switching circuits,” IRE Transactions on Electronic Computers, Vol. 257, pp. 161–190 and 275–303, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. Janicki, “A formal semantics of concurrent systems with a priority relation,” Acta Informatica, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 33–55, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. Janicki and M. Koutny, “Invariant semantics of nets with inhibitor arcs,” in CONCUR'91: 2nd International Conference on Concurrency Theory, 1991, pp. 317–331.

  16. R. Janicki and M. Koutny, “Invariants and paradigms of concurrency theory,” in Proceedings of Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe, 1991, pp. 59–74.

  17. L. Lamport and N. Lynch, “Distributed computing: Models and methods,” in J. van Leeuwen (Ed.), Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B, The MIT Press—Elsevier, 1990, pp. 1159–1196.

  18. A.J. Martin, “The limitations to delay-insensitivity in asynchronous circuits,” in Advanced Research in VLSI, 1990, pp. 263–278.

  19. R.E. Miller, Switching Theory, Volume II: Sequential Circuits and Machines, John Wiley & Sons, 1965.

  20. C.E. Molnar, T. P. Fang, and F.U. Rosenberger, “Synthesis of delay-insensitive modules,” in H. Fuchs (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1985 Chapel Hill Conference on VLSI, Rockville, Maryland, Computer Science Press, 1985, pp. 67–86.

    Google Scholar 

  21. D.E. Muller and W.S. Bartky, “A theory of asynchronous circuits,” in Proceedings of an International Symposium on Switching Theory, April 1957, pp. 204–243.

  22. V.R. Pratt, “Modeling concurrency with partial orders,” Int. J. of Parallel Programming, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 33–71, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  23. D.K. Probst and H.F. Li, “Modeling reactive hardware processes using partial orders,” Semantics for Concurrency, pp. 324–343, 1990.

  24. D.K. Probst and H.F. Li, “Using partial-order semantics to avoid the state explosion problem in asynchronous systems,” Computer-Aided Verification, pp. 146–155, 1990.

  25. D.K. Probst and H.F. Li, “Partial-order model checking: A guide for the perplexed,” Computer-Aided Verification, pp. 322–331, 1991.

  26. W. Reisig, “On semantics of petri nets,” Formal Models in Programming, pp. 347–372, 1985.

  27. W. Reisig, “Temporal logic and causality in concurrent systems,” in Concurrency 88, 1988, pp. 121–139.

  28. G. Rozenberg and R. Verraedt, “Subset languages of petri nets part I: The relationship to string languages and normal forms,” Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 26, pp. 301–326, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  29. S.J. Silver, “True concurrency in models of asynchronous circuit behaviour,” Master's thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, 1999.

  30. J.T. Udding, “Classification and composition of delay-insensitive circuits,” Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 1984.

  31. J.L.A. van de Snepscheut, Trace Theory and VLSI Design, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  32. V. Varshavsky, M. Kishinevsky, V. Marakhovsky, L. Rosenblum, A. Taubin et al., Self-Timed Control of Concurrent Processes, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990.

  33. T. Verhoeff, “A theory of delay-insensitive systems,” Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, May 1994.

  34. Vogler, “A generalization of traces,” Theoretical Informatics and Applications, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1991.

  35. A. Yakovlev, L. Lavagno, and A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, “A unified signal transition graph model for asynchronous control circuit synthesis,” Formal Methods in System Design, Vol. 9, pp. 139–188, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  36. H. Zhang, “Delay-insensitive networks,” Master's thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada, 1997.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2L 3G1

    S.J. Silver & J.A. Brzozowski

Authors
  1. S.J. Silver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J.A. Brzozowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Silver, S., Brzozowski, J. True Concurrency in Models of Asynchronous Circuit Behavior. Formal Methods in System Design 22, 183–203 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022902408130

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022902408130

Search

Navigation