Weak Sequential Composition in Process Algebras
- 427 Downloads
In this paper we study a special operator for sequential composition, which is defined relative to a dependency relation over the actions of a given system. The idea is that actions which are not dependent (intuitively because they share no common resources) do not have to wait for one another to proceed, even if they are composed sequentially. Such a notion has been studied before in a linear-time setting, but until recently there has been no systematic investigation in the context of process algebras.
We give a structural operational semantics for a process algebraic language containing such a sequential composition operator, which shows some interesting interplay with choice. We give a complete axiomatisation of strong bisimilarity and we show consistency of the operational semantics with an event-based denotational semantics developed recently by the second author. The axiom system allows to derive the communication closed layers law, which in the linear time setting has been shown to be a very useful instrument in correctness preserving transformations. We conclude with a couple of examples.
KeywordsOperational Semantic Sequential Composition Process Algebra Denotational Semantic Complete Axiomatisation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.L. Aceto, B. Bloom, and F. Vaandrager. Turning SOS rules into equations. In Seventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science pages 113–124. IEEE, Computer Society Press, 1992. Full version available as CWI Report CS-R9218, June 1992, Amsterdam. To appear in the LICS 92 Special Issue of Information and Computation.Google Scholar
- 3.J. C. M. Baeten and F. W. Vaandrager. An algebra for process creation. In J. W. de Bakker, 25 Jaar Semantiek - Liber Amicorum. Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, Apr. 1989. Also availabe as: Report CS-R8907, CWI, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
- 4.J. C. M. Baeten and W. P. Weijland. Process Algebra. Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
- 5.M. A. Bednarczyk. Categories of Asynchronous Systems. PhD thesis, University of Sussex, Oct. 1987. Available as Report 1/88, School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences, University of Sussex.Google Scholar
- 7.B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A. R. Meyer. Bisimulation can’t be traced. In Fifteenth Annual Symposium on the Principles of Programming Languages pages 229–239. ACM, 1988. Preliminary Report.Google Scholar
- 8.J. W. de Bakker, W.-P. de Roever, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Linear Time, Branching Time and Partial Order in Logics and Models for Concurrency, volume 354 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 1989.Google Scholar
- 9.P. Degano and R. Gorrieri. An operational definition of action refinement. Technical Report TR-28/92, Università di Pisa, 1992. To appear in Information and Computation.Google Scholar
- 10.M. Fokkinga, M. Poel, and J. Zwiers. Modular completeness for communication closed layers. In E. Best, editor, Concur ‘83, volume 715 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 50–65. Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
- 11.U. Goltz and N. Götz. Modelling a simple communication protocol in a language with action refinement. Draft version, 1991.Google Scholar
- 12.C. A. R. Hoare. Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice-Hall, 1985.Google Scholar
- 13.W. Janssen, M. Poel, and J. Zwiers. Actions systems and action refinement in the development of parallel systems. In J. C. M. Baeten and J. F. Groote, editors, Concur ‘81, volume 527 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 298–316. Springer-Verlag, 1991.Google Scholar
- 14.A. Mazurkiewicz. Basic notions of trace theory. In de Bakker et al. , pages 285–363.Google Scholar
- 15.R. Milner. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, 1989.Google Scholar
- 16.A. Rensink. Models and Methods for Action Refinement. PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands, Aug. 1993.Google Scholar
- 19.F. W. Vaandrager. Expressiveness results for process algebras. Report CS-R9301, Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science, 1993. Available by ftp: ftp.cwi.nl, pub/CWlreports/AP.Google Scholar
- 20.H. Wehrheim. Parametric action refinement. Hildesheimer Informatik-Berichte 18/93, Institut für Informatik, Universität Hildesheim, Nov. 1993. To be presented at PRO-COMET ‘84, San Miniato, June 1994.Google Scholar
- 21.J. Zwiers. Layering and action refinement for timed systems. In J. W. de Bakker, C. Huizing, W.-P. de Roever, and G. Rozenberg, editors, Real-Time: Theory in Practice, volume 600 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 1991.Google Scholar