Interleaving semantics and action refinement with atomic choice

  • Ingo Czaja
  • Rob J. van Glabbeek
  • Ursula Goltz
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 609)

Abstract

We investigate how to restrict the concept of action refinement such that established interleaving equivalences for concurrent systems are preserved under these restricted refinements. We show that interleaving bisimulation is preserved under refinement if we do not allow to refine action occurrences deciding choices and action occurrences involved in autoconcurrency On the other hand, interleaving trace equivalence is still not preserved under these restricted refinements.

Keywords

Concurrency action refinement atomicity flow event structures semantic equivalences interleaving vs. partial orders bisimulation 

References

  1. [Aceto]
    L. Aceto: Action Refinement in Process Algebras, PhD-Thesis, University of Sussex, 1990, Report No. 3/91, University of Sussex, Computer Science, February 1991Google Scholar
  2. [AH]
    L. Aceto, M. Hennessy: Adding Action Refinement to a Finite Process Algebra, Report No. 6/90, University of Sussex, Computer Science, November 1990, extended abstract in: Proc. ICALP 91, LNCS 510, Springer-Verlag, pp 506–519, 1991Google Scholar
  3. [BDKP]
    E. Best, R. Devillers, A. Kiehn, L. Pomello: Concurrent Bisimulation in Petri Nets, Acta Informatica, Vol. 28, pp 231–264, 1991Google Scholar
  4. [Boudol]
    G. Boudol: Flow Event Structures and Flow Nets, in I. Guessarian (ed.): Semantics of Systems of Concurrent Processes, LNCS 469, Springer-Verlag, pp 62–95, 1990Google Scholar
  5. [BC]
    G. Boudol, I. Castellani: Permutation of Transitions: An Event Structure Semantics for CCS and SCCS, in J.W. de Bakker, W.-P. de Roever & G. Rozenberg (eds.): Linear Time, Branching Time and Partial Order in Logics and Models for Concurrency, LNCS 354, Springer-Verlag, pp 411–427, 1989Google Scholar
  6. [BGV]
    W. Brauer, R. Gold, W. Vogler: A Survey of Behaviour and Equivalence Preserving Refinements of Petri Nets, in: Advances in Petri Nets 1990, LNCS 483, Springer-Verlag, pp 1–46, 1990Google Scholar
  7. [DD]a
    Ph. Darondeau, P. Degano: Event structures, Causal trees, and Refinements, in: Proc. MFCS 90, LNCS 452, Springer-Verlag, pp 239–245, 1990Google Scholar
  8. [DD]b
    Ph. Darondeau, P. Degano: Refinement of Actions in Event Structures and Causal Trees, manuscript, 1991Google Scholar
  9. [Devillers]
    R. Devillers: Maximality Preserving Bisimulation, Technical Report LIT-1214, Université Libre de Bruxelles, March 1990, to appear in TCSGoogle Scholar
  10. [GG a]
    R.J. van Glabbeek, U. Goltz: Refinement of Actions in Causality Based Models, in J.W. de Bakker, W.-P. de Roever & G. Rozenberg (eds.): Stepwise Refinement of Distributed Systems: Models, Formalism, Correctness, LNCS 430, Springer-Verlag, pp 267–300, 1990Google Scholar
  11. [GG b]
    R.J. van Glabbeek, U. Goltz: Equivalences and Refinement, in: I. Guessarian (ed.): Semantics of Systems of Concurrent Processes, LNCS 469, Springer-Verlag, pp 309–333, 1990Google Scholar
  12. [GG c]
    R.J. van Glabbeek, U. Goltz: A Deadlock-sensitive Congruence for Action Refinement, SFB-Bericht Nr. 342/23/90 A, TUM-19044, Technische Universität München, November 1990Google Scholar
  13. [Milner]
    R. Milner: A Calculus of Communicating Systems, LNCS 92, Springer-Verlag, 1980Google Scholar
  14. [NEL]
    M. Nielsen, U. Engberg, K. S. Larsen: Fully Abstract Models for a Process Language with Refinement, in J.W. de Bakker, W.-P. de Roever & G. Rozenberg (eds.): Linear Time, Branching Time and Partial Order in Logics and Models for Concurrency, LNCS 354, Springer-Verlag, pp 523–548, 1989Google Scholar
  15. [NPW]
    M. Nielsen, G.D. Plotkin, G. Winskel: Petri Nets, Event Structures and Domains, Part I, Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp 85–108, 1981Google Scholar
  16. [Park]
    D. Park: Concurrency and Automata on Infinite Sequences, in P. Deussen (ed.): Proc. 5th GI-Conference on Theoretical Computer Science, LNCS 104, Springer-Verlag, pp 167–183, 1981Google Scholar
  17. [Vogler a]
    W. Vogler: Failures Semantics Based on Interval Semiwords is a Congruence for Refinement, Distributed Computing, Vol. 4, pp 139–162, 1991Google Scholar
  18. [Vogler b]
    W. Vogler: Bisimulation and Action Refinement, in: Proc. STACS 91, LNCS 480, Springer-Verlag, pp 309–321, 1991Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ingo Czaja
    • 1
  • Rob J. van Glabbeek
    • 2
  • Ursula Goltz
    • 1
  1. 1.Gesellschaft für Mathematik und DatenverarbeitungSankt AugustinGermany
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations