Bounded MSC Communication

  • Markus Lohrey
  • Anca Muscholl
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2303)


Message sequence charts (MSCs) and high-level message sequence charts (HMSCs) are popular formalisms for the specification of communication protocols between asynchronous processes. An important concept in this context is the size of the communication buffers used between processes. Since real systems impose limitations on the capacity (or speed) of communication links, we ask whether a given HMSC can be implemented with respect to a given buffer size imposed by the environment. We introduce four different measures for buffer sizes and investigate for each of these measures the complexity of deciding whether a given MSC (or HMSC, or hierarchical MSC) satisfies a given bound on the buffer size. The complexity of these problems varies between the classes P, NP, and coNP.


Polynomial Time Transitive Closure Outgoing Edge Communication Graph Local Boundedness 
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.


  1. 1.
    B. Genest, and A. Muscholl. Pattern Matchingand Membership for Hierarchical Message Sequence Charts. To appear in Proc. of LATIN 2002.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. G. Henriksen, M. Mukund, K. N. Kumar, and P. Thiagarajan. On message sequence graphs and finitely generated regular MSC languages. In Proc. of ICALP’00, LNCS 1853, pp. 675–686, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. G. Henriksen, M. Mukund, K. N. Kumar, and P. Thiagarajan. Regular collections of message sequence charts. In Proc. of MFCS’00, LNCS 1893, pp. 675–686, 2000.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. L. Lawler. Combinatorial Optimization: Networks and Matroids. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Morin. On regular message sequence chart languages and relationships to Mazurkiewicz trace theory. In Proc. of FoSSaCS’01, LNCS 2030, pp. 332–346, 2001.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Mukund, K. N. Kumar, and M. A. Sohoni. Synthesizingdistributed finite-state systems from MSCs. In Proc. of CONCUR’00, LNCS 1877, pp. 521–535, 2000.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Muscholl, D. Peled, and Z. Su. Decidingprop erties for message sequence charts. In Proc. of FoSSaCS’98, LNCS 1378, pp. 226–242, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C. H. Papadimitriou. Computational Complexity. Addison Wesley, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Sethi. Complete register allocation problems. SIAM Journal on Computing, 4(3):226–248, 1975.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. Simon. On minimum flow and transitive reduction. In Proc. of ICALP’88, LNCS 317, pp. 535–546, 1988.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Markus Lohrey
    • 1
  • Anca Muscholl
    • 1
  1. 1.LIAFAUniversité Paris VIIParis cedex 05France

Personalised recommendations