Advertisement

Fair Testing Revisited: A Process-Algebraic Characterisation of Conflicts

  • Robi Malik
  • David Streader
  • Steve Reeves
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3299)

Abstract

This paper studies conflicts from a process-algebraic point of view and shows how they are related to the testing theory of fair testing. Conflicts have been introduced in the context of discrete event systems, where two concurrent systems are said to be in conflict if they can get trapped in a situation where they are waiting or running endlessly, forever unable to complete their common task. In order to analyse complex discrete event systems, conflict-preserving notions of refinement and equivalence are needed. This paper characterises an appropriate refinement, called the conflict preorder, and provides a denotational semantics for it. Its relationship to other known process preorders is explored, and it is shown to generalise the fair testing preorder in process-algebra for reasoning about conflicts in discrete event systems.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Brandin, B., Charbonnier, F.: The supervisory control of the automated manufacturing system of the AIP. In: Proc. Rensselaer’s 4th Int. Conf. Computer Integrated Manufacturing and Automation Technology, Troy, NY, USA, pp. 319–324 (1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brinksma, E., Rensink, A., Vogler, W.: Fair testing. In: Lee, I., Smolka, S.A. (eds.) CONCUR 1995. LNCS, vol. 962, pp. 313–327. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brinksma, E., Rensink, A., Vogler, W.: Applications of fair testing. In: Gotzhein, R., Bredereke, J. (eds.) Formal Description Techniques IX: Theory, application and tools, IFIP TC6 WG6.1 Int. Conf. Formal Description Techniques IX / Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification XVI, Kaiserslautern, Germany. IFIP Conf. Proc., vol. 69, pp. 145–160. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bryant, R.E.: Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Trans. Comput. 35(8), 677–691 (1986)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cassandras, C.G., Lafortune, S.: Introduction to Discrete Event Systems, September 1999. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clarke, E.M., Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P.: Automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications. ACM Trans. Programming Languages and Systems 8(2), 244–263 (1986)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clarke Jr., E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dietrich, P., Malik, R., Wonham, W.M., Brandin, B.A.: Implementation considerations in supervisory control. In: Caillaud, B., Darondeau, P., Lavagno, L., Xie, X. (eds.) Synthesis and Control of Discrete Event Systems, pp. 185–201. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hennessy, M.: Algebraic Theory of Processes. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1985)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hopcroft, J.E., Motwani, R., Ullman, J.D.: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leduc, R.J., Brandin, B.A., Wonham, W.M.: Hierarchical interface-based non-blocking verification. In: Proc. Canadian Conf. Electrical and Computer Engineering, May 2000, pp. 1–6 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leduc, R.J., Wonham, W.M.: PLC implementation of a DES supervisor for a manufacturing testbed. In: Proc. 33rd Allerton Conf. Communication, Control and Computing, Monticello, Illinois, October 1995, pp. 519–528 (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Malik, P.: From Supervisory Control to Nonblocking Controllers for Discrete Event Systems. PhD thesis, University of Kaiserslautern, Kaiserslautern, Germany (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Malik, R.: On the set of certain conflicts of a given language. In: Proc. 7th Int. Workshop on Discrete Event Systems, WODES 2004, Reims, France (September 2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Malik, R., Mühlfeld, R.: A case study in verification of UML statecharts: the PROFIsafe protocol. J. Universal Computer Science 9(2), 138–151 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McMillan, K.L.: Symbolic Model Checking. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Milner, R.: A Calculus of Communication Systems. LNCS, vol. 92. Springer, Heidelberg (1980)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Natarajan, V., Cleaveland, R.: Divergence and fair testing. In: Proc. 22nd Int. Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, ICALP 1995, pp. 648–659 (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nicola, R.D., Hennessy, M.C.B.: Testing equivalences for processes. Theoretical Comput. Sci. 34(1-2), 83–133 (1984)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ramadge, P.J.G., Wonham, W.M.: The control of discrete event systems. Proc. IEEE 77(1), 81–98 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roscoe, W.: The Theory and Practice of Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1997)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    van Glabbeek, R.J.: The linear time — branching time spectrum I: The semantics of concrete, sequential processes. In: Bergstra, J.A., Ponse, A., Smolka, S.A. (eds.) Handbook of Process Algebra, pp. 3–99. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wong, K.C., Thistle, J.G., Malhame, R.P., Hoang, H.-H.: Supervisory control of distributed systems: Conflict resolution. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications 10, 131–186 (2000)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wong, K.C., Wonham, W.M.: Modular control and coordination of discreteevent systems. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications 8(3), 247–297 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wonham, W.M.: Notes on control of discrete event systems, 1999. Systems Control Group, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada; at, http://www.control.utoronto.ca/under “Research”.
  27. 27.
    Zhang, Z.H., Wonham, W.M.: STCT: An efficient algorithm for supervisory control design. In: Caillaud, B., Darondeau, P., Lavagno, L., Xie, X. (eds.) Synthesis and Control of Discrete Event Systems, pp. 77–100. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robi Malik
    • 1
  • David Streader
    • 1
  • Steve Reeves
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations