Traces, Pomsets, Fairness and Full Abstraction for Communicating Processes

  • Stephen Brookes
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2421)


We provide a denotational trace semantics for processes with synchronous communication and a form of weakly fair parallelism. The semantics is fully abstract: processes have the same trace sets if and only if their communication behaviors are identical in all contexts. The model can easily be adapted for asynchronously communicating processes, or for shared-memory parallel programs. We also provide a partial-order semantics, using pomsets adapted for synchronization and our form of fairness. The pomset semantics can also be adjusted to model alternative paradigms. The traces of a process can be recovered from the pomset semantics by taking all fair interleavings consistent with the partial order.


Operational Semantic Parallel Composition Asynchronous Communication Communicate Sequential Process Synchronous Communication 
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.
    K. R. Apt, N. Francez, and S. Katz, Appraising fairness in languages for distributed programming, Distributed Computing, 2(4):226–241, 1988.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. A. Bergstra and J.-W. Klop, Process Algebra for Synchronous Communication, Information and Computation, 60(1/3):109–137, 1984.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. A. Bergstra, J.-W. Klop, and J. Tucker, Process algebra with asynchronous communication mechanisms, Seminar on Concurrency, Springer LNCS 197, pp. 76–95, 1985.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    F. de Boer, J. Kok, C. Palamidessi, and J. Rutten, The failure of failures in a paradigm for asynchronous concurrency, CONCUR’91, Springer LNCS 527, pp. 111–126, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Brookes, Full abstraction for a shared-variable parallel language, Information and Computation, 127(2):145–163, June 1996.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Brookes, The Essence of Parallel Algol, 11th LICS, pp. 164–173, July 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Brookes, Idealized CSP: Combining Procedures with Communicating Processes, Proc. MFPS XIII, ENTCS 6, Elsevier Science, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. Brookes, On the Kahn Principle and Fair Networks, MFPS XIV, Queen Mary Westfield College, University of London, May 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Brookes, Deconstructing CCS and CSP: Asynchronous Communication, Fairness and Full Abstraction, MFPS XVI, 2000.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Brookes and S. Older, Full abstraction for strongly fair communicating processes, MFPS XI, ENTCS 1, Elsevier Science, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Brookes, C. A. R. Hoare, and A. W. Roscoe, A Theory of Communicating Sequential Processes, JACM 31(3):560–599, July 1984.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Brookes, and A. W. Roscoe, An improved failures model for CSP, Seminar on concurrency, Springer-Verlag, LNCS 197, 1984.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. Costa and C. Stirling, A fair calculus of communicating systems, ACTA Informatica 21:417–441, 1984.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    G. Costa and C. Stirling, Weak and strong fairness in CCS, Technical Report CSR-16-85, University of Edinburgh, January 1985.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    N. Francez, Fairness, Springer-Verlag, 1986.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. van Glabbeek, The Linear Time-Branching Time Spectrum, Handbook of Process Algebra, Elsevier, 2001.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Hennessy, An algebraic theory of fair asynchronous communicating processes, Theoretical Computer Science, 49:121–143, 1987.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Hennessy and R. Milner, Algebraic laws for nondeterminism and concurrency, JACM 32(1):137–161, 1985.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    C. A. R. Hoare, Communicating Sequential Processes, CACM 21(8):666–677, 1978.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    C. A. R. Hoare, A Model for Communicating Sequential Processes, Technical Monograph PRG-22, Oxford University, June 1981.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    C. A. R. Hoare, Communicating Sequential Processes, Prentice-Hall, 1985.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. Milner, A Calculus of Communicating Systems, Springer LNCS 92, 1980.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    R. Milner, Communication and Concurrency, Prentice-Hall, London, 1989.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    S. Older, A Denotational Framework for Fair Communicating Processes, Ph.D. thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, December 1996.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    S. Older, A Framework for Fair Communicating Processes, Proc. MFPS XIII, ENTCS 6, Elsevier Science, 1997.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    S. Owicki and L. Lamport, Proving liveness properties of concurrent programs, ACM TOPLAS, 4(3): 455–495, July 1982.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    D. Park, On the semantics of fair parallelism. Abstract Software Specifications, Springer-Verlag LNCS vol. 86, 504–526, 1979.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    C. A. Petri, Concepts of Net Theory, Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, September 1973.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    J. Parrow, Fairness Properties in Process Algebras, Ph. D. thesis, University of Uppsala, 1985.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    I. Phillips, Refusal testing, Theoretical Computer Science, 50(2):241–284, 1987.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    V. Pratt, On the Composition of Processes, Proc. 9th ACM POPL Symp., 1982.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    V. Pratt, Modeling concurrency with partial orders, International Journal on Parallel Processing, 15(1): 33–71, 1986.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    A.W. Roscoe, The Theory and Practice of Concurrency, Prentice-Hall, 1998.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    V. Saraswat, M. Rinard, and P. Panangaden, Semantic foundations of concurrent constraint programming, Proc. 18th ACM POPL Symposium, 1991.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    G. Winskel, Events in Computation, Ph. D. thesis, Edinburgh University, 1980.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen Brookes
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations