2-Nested Simulation Is Not Finitely Equationally Axiomatizable

  • Luca Aceto
  • Wan Fokkink
  • Anna Ingólfsdóttir
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2010)


2-nested simulation was introduced by Groote and Vaan- drager [10] as the coarsest equivalence included in completed trace equiv- alence for which the tyft/tyxt format is a congruence format. In the linear time-branching time spectrum of van Glabbeek [8], 2-nested simulation is one of the few equivalences for which no finite equational axiomati- zation is presented. In this paper we prove that such an axiomatization does not exist for 2-nested simulation.


Operational Semantic Transition Rule Proof System Axiom System Label Transition System 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    L. Aceto, Z. Ésik, and A. Ingólfsdóttir, On the two-variable fragment of the equational theory of the max-sum algebra of the natural numbers, in Proceedings of the 17th STACS, H. Reichel and S. Tison, eds., vol. 1770 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, Feb. 2000, pp. 267–278.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Aceto, Z. Ésik, and A. Ingólfsdóttir, The max-plus algebra of the natural numbers has no finite equational basis, research report, BRICS, Department of Computer Science, Aalborg University, October 1999. Pp. 25. To appear in Theoretical Computer Science.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. Aceto, W. Fokkink, and A. Ingólfsdóttir,A menagerie of non-finitely based process semantics over BPA * from ready simulation to completed traces, Mathematical Structures in Computer Science, 8 (1998), pp. 193–230.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Baeten and J. Klop, eds., Proceedings CONCUR 90, Amsterdam, vol. 458 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Bergstra and J. W. Klop, Fixed point semantics in process algebras, Report IW 206, Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1982.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. H. Conway, Regular Algebra and Finite Machines, Mathematics Series (R. Brown and J. De Wet eds.), Chapman and Hall, London, United Kingdom, 1971.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. L. Gischer, The equational theory of pomsets, Theoretical Comput. Sci., 61 (1988), pp. 199–224.CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. van Glabbeek, The linear time-branching time spectrum, in Baeten and Klop [4], pp. 278–297.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. F. Groote, A new strategy for proving ωcompleteness with applications in process algebra, in Baeten and Klop [4], pp. 314–331.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. F. Groote and F. Vaandrager, Structured operational semantics and bisimulation as a congruence, Information and Computation, 100 (1992), pp. 202–260.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Keller, Formal verification of parallel programs, Comm. ACM, 19 (1976), pp. 371–384.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Lin, An interactive proof tool for process algebras, in 9th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, vol. 577 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Cachan, France, 13-15 Feb. 1992, Springer, pp. 617–618.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. Milner, An algebraic definition of simulation between programs, in Proceedings 2nd Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, William Kaufmann, 1971, pp. 481–489.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    —, Communication and Concurrency, Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, 1989.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    W. Mitchell and D. Carlisle, Modal observation equivalence of processes, Technical Report UMCS–96–1–1, Manchester University, Computer Science, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    F. Moller, The importance of the left merge operator in process algebras, in Proceedings 17th ICALP, Warwick, M. Paterson, ed., vol. 443 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, July 1990, pp. 752–764.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    —, The nonexistence of finite axiomatisations for CCS congruences, in Proceedings 5th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, Philadelphia, USA, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1990, pp. 142–153.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    G. Plotkin, A structural approach to operational semantics, Report DAIMI FN-19, Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, 1981.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    V. Redko, On defining relations for the algebra of regular events, Ukrainskii Matematicheskii Zhurnal, 16 (1964), pp. 120–126. In Russian.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    P. Sewell, Nonaxiomatisability of equivalences over finite state processes, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 90 (1997), pp. 163–191.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    S.K. Shukla, D.J. Rosenkrantz, H.B. Hunt iii, and R. E. Stearns, A HORNSAT based approach to the polynomial time decidability of simulation relations for finite state processes, in DIMACS Workshop on Satisfiability Problem: Theory and Applications, D. Du, J. Gu, and P. M. Pardalos, eds., vol. 35 of DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Computer cience, 1996, pp. 603–642.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luca Aceto
    • 1
  • Wan Fokkink
    • 2
  • Anna Ingólfsdóttir
    • 1
  1. 1.BRICS(Basic Research in Computer Science) Centre of the Danish National Research Foundation Department of Computer ScienceAalborg UniversityAalborg ØDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Software EngineeringCWIAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations