Advertisement

Hiding more of hidden algebra

  • Joseph Goguen
  • Grigore Roşu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1709)

Abstract

Behavioral specification is a rapidly advancing area of algebraic semantics that supports practical applications by allowing models (implementations) that only behaviorally satisfy specifications, infinitary data structures (such as streams), behavioral refinements, and coinduction proof methods. This paper generalizes the hidden algebra approach to allow: (P1) operations with multiple hidden arguments, and (P2) defining behavioral equivalence with a subset of operations, in addition to the already present (P3) built-in data types, (P4) nondeterminism, (P5) concurrency, and (P6) non-congruent operations. All important results generalize, but more elegant formulations use the new institution in Section 5. Behavioral satisfaction appeared 1981 in [20], hidden algebra 1989 in [9], multiple hidden arguments 1992 in [1], congruent and behavioral operations in [1 18], behavioral equivalence defined by a subset of operations in [1], and non-congruent operations in [5]; all this was previously integrated in [21], but this paper gives new examples, institutions, and results relating hidden algebra to information hiding. We assume familiarity with basics of algebraic specification, e.g., [11 13].

Keywords

Algebraic Semantic Behavioral Equation Candidate Relation Japan Advance Institute Context Induction 
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]
    Gilles Bernot, Michael Bidoit, and Teodor Knapik. Observational specifications and the indistinguishability assumption. Theoretical Computer Science, 139(1-2):275–314, 1995. Submitted 1992.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Michael Bidoit and Rolf Hennicker. Behavioral theories and the proof of behavioral properties. Theoretical Computer Science, 165(1):3–55, 1996.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Michael Bidoit and Rolf Hennicker. Modular correctness proofs of behavioral implementations. Acta Informatica, 35(11):951–1005, 1998.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Michael Bidoit and Rolf Hennicker. Observer complete definitions are behaviorally coherent. Technical Report LSV-99-4, ENS de Cachan, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Răzvan Diaconescu. Behavioral coherence in object-oriented algebraic specification. Technical Report IS-RR-98-0017F, Japan Advanced Institute for Science and Technology, June 1998. Submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Răzvan Diaconescu and Kokichi Futatsugi. CafeOBJ Report: The Language, Proof Techniques, and Methodologies for Object-Oriented Algebraic Specification. World Scientific, 1998. AMAST Series in Computing, volume 6.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Răzvan Diaconescu, Joseph Goguen, and Petros Stefaneas. Logical support for modularization. In Gerard Huet and Gordon Plotkin, editors, Logical Environments, pages 83–130. Cambridge, 1993.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Răzvan Diaconescu and Kokichi Futatsugi. Logical foundations of CafeOBJ. Submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Joseph Goguen. Types as theories. In George Michael Reed, Andrew William Roscoe, and Ralph F. Wachter, editors, Topology and Category Theory in Computer Science, pages 357–390. Oxford, 1991. Proceedings of a Conference held at Oxford, June 1989.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Joseph Goguen and Rod Burstall. Institutions: Abstract model theory for specification and programming. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 39(1):95–146, January 1992.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Joseph Goguen and Grant Malcolm. Algebraic Semantics of Imperative Programs. MIT, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Joseph Goguen and Grant Malcolm. A hidden agenda. Theoretical Computer Science, to appear 1999. Also UCSD Dept. Computer Science & Eng. Technical Report CS97-538, May 1997.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Joseph Goguen, James Thatcher, and Eric Wagner. An initial algebra approach to the specification, correctness and implementation of abstract data types. In Raymond Yeh, editor, Current Trends in Programming Methodology, IV, pages 80–149. Prentice-Hall, 1978.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Rolf Hennicker. Context induction: a proof principle for behavioral abstractions. Formal Aspects of Computing, 3(4):326–345, 1991.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Rolf Hennicker and Michel Bidoit. Observational logic. In Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology (AMAST’98), volume 1548 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 263–277. Springer, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Bart Jacobs and Jan Rutten. A tutorial on (co)algebras and (co)induction. Bulletin of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science, 62:222–259, 1997.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Seikô Mikami. Semantics of equational specifications with module import and verification method of behavioral equations. In Proceedings, CafeOBJ Symposium. Japan Advanced Institute for Science and Technology, 1998. Numazu, Japan, April 1998.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Peter Padawitz. Swinging data types: Syntax, semantics, and theory. In Proceedings, WADT’95, volume 1130 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 409–435. Springer, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Peter Padawitz. Towards the one-tiered design of data types and transition systems. In Proceedings, WADT’97, volume 1376 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 365–380. Springer, 1998.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Horst Reichel. Behavioural equivalence-a unifying concept for initial and final specifications. In Proceedings, Third Hungarian Computer Science Conference. Akademiai Kiado, 1981. Budapest.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Grigore Răsu and Joseph Goguen. Hidden congruent deduction. In Ricardo Caferra and Gernot Salzer, editors, Proceedings, First-Order Theorem Proving FTP‘98, pages 213–223. Technische Universitat Wien, 1998. Full version to appear in Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph Goguen
    • 1
  • Grigore Roşu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science & EngineeringUniversity of California at San DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations