Advertisement

Congruent Weak Conformance, a Partial Order among Processes

  • Ronald W. Brower
  • Kenneth S. Stevens
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2529)

Abstract

This paper presents a new property between processes arising from a set of relations called weak conformations. The largest, called weak conformance, is analogous to Milner’s observational equivalence. Unlike observational equivalence, however, weak conformance is not an equivalence but rather a preorder between processes. Like the previous property of logic conformance, weak conformance allows behaviors in the implementation that are unreachable in the specification. Unlike logic conformance, however, weak conformance exploits output concurrencies and allows interleaving of extraneous output actions in the implementation. Finally, reasonable restrictions in CCS syntax strengthen weak conformance to a precongruence. The resulting property, congruent weak conformance, forms a partial ordering among processes. As a precongruence, it models safe substitution of hardware.

Keywords

Parallel Composition Communicate Sequential Process Weak Bisimulations Weak Conformance Extraneous Output 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Alur, R., Brayton, R.K., Henzinger, T.A., Qadeer, S, Rajamani, S.K.: Partial Order Reduction in Symbolic State Space Exploration. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Computer-aided Verification (CAV 1997), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1254, Berlin Heidelberg New York (1997) 340–351Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arun-Kumar, S., Hennessy. M.: An Efficiency Preorder for Processes. Acta Informatica, Vol. 29 (1992) 737–76zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arun-Kumar, S., Natajaran, V.: Conformance: A Precongruence Close to Bisimilarity. In: Desel, J. (ed.): International Workshop on Structures in Concurrency Theory (STRICT’ 95). Workshops in Computing, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York (1995) 55–68.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bloom, B., Istrail, S. Meyer, A.R.: Bisimulation Can’t Be Traced. In: Journal of the ACM. Vol. 42. No.1. (January 1995) 232–268zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brookes, S.D., Hoare, C.A.R., Roscoe, A.W.: A Theory of Communicating Sequential Processes. In: Journal of the ACM, Vol. 31. No. 3. (1984) 560–599zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corradini, F., Gorrieri, R., Roccetti, M.: Performance Preorder and Competitive Equivalence. In: Acta Informatica, Vol. 34. (1997)805–835CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Degano, P., Priami, C.: Non-interleaving Semantics for Mobile Processes. In: Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 216. (1999) 237–270zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De Nicola, R., Hennessy, M.: Testing Equivalences for Processes. In: Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 34. (1984) 83–133zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Godefroid, P. Partial Order Methods for the Verification of Concurrent Systems. Doctoral Thesis. University of Liege. (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Groote, J. F., Vaandrager, F.: Structured Operational Semantics and Bisimulation as a Congruence. In: Information and Computation, Vol. 100. (1992) 202–260zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hennessy, M.: Algebraic Theory of Processes. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1988)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hennessy, M., Milner, R.: Algebraic Laws for Nondeterminism and Concurrency. In: Journal of the Association of Computing Machinery, Vol. 32, No. 1. (1985) 137–161zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating Sequential Processes. In: (McKeag, R.M., Macnaghten, A.M. (eds.): On the Construction of Programs-an Advanced Course. Cambridge University Press. (1980) 229–254Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice Hall International, London (1985)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ingólfsdóttir, A., Schalk, A.: A Fully Abstract Denotational Model for Observational Congruence. Basic Research in Computer Science Report BRICS-RS-95-40 (August 1995)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, IEEE Standard VHDL Language Reference Manual. IEEE Press, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lüttgen, G., Vogler, W.: A Faster-than Relation for Asynchronous Processes. ICASE Report No. 2001-2. NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia (January 2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Milner, R.: Calculi for Synchrony and Asynchrony. In: Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 25 (1983) 267–310zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, New York, London (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Olderog, E.R., Hoare, C.A.R.: Specification-oriented Semantics for Communicating Processes. In: Acta Informatica, Vol. 23. (1986) 9–66zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Park, D.M.R.: Concurrency and Automata on Infinite Processes. In: Deussen P. (ed.): Proceedings 5th GI Conference. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 104. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York (1981) 167–183Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Phillips, I.C.C.: Refusal Testing. In: Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 50 (1987) 241–284zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rounds, W.C., Brookes, S.D.: Possible Futures, Acceptances, Refusals and Communicating Processes. In: Proceedings 22nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, New York (1981) 140–149Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Segala, Roberto.: A Process Algebraic View of I/O Automata. MS Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. (1994)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stevens, K.S.: Practical Verification and Synthesis of Low Latency Asynchronous Systems. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Calgary. Calgary, Alberta, Canada (1994)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    van Glabbeek, R.J.: The Linear Time-Branching Time Spectrum II. In: CONCUR’93. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 715. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York (1993)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronald W. Brower
    • 1
  • Kenneth S. Stevens
    • 2
  1. 1.Air Force Research LaboratoryEmbedded Information Systems Engineering Branch Wright-Patterson Air Force BaseOhioUSA
  2. 2.Intel CorporationStrategic CAD LabsPortland, OregonUSA

Personalised recommendations