Interaction and Observation: Categorical Semantics of Reactive Systems Trough Dialgebras
Abstract
We use dialgebras, generalising both algebras and coalgebras, as a complement of the standard coalgebraic framework, aimed at describing the semantics of an interactive system by the means of reaction rules. In this model, interaction is built-in, and semantic equivalence arises from it, instead of being determined by a (possibly difficult) understanding of the side effects of a component in isolation. Behavioural equivalence in dialgebras is determined by how a given process interacts with the others, and the obtained observations. We develop a technique to inter-define categories of dialgebras of different functors, that in particular permits us to compare a standard coalgebraic semantics and its dialgebraic counterpart. We exemplify the framework using the CCS and the π-calculus. Remarkably, the dialgebra giving semantics to the π-calculus does not require the use of presheaf categories.
Keywords
Parallel Operator Natural Transformation Categorical Semantic Operational Semantic Full SubcategoryPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Fiore, M.P., Turi, D.: Semantics of name and value passing. In: 12th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS), pp. 93–104. IEEE (2001)Google Scholar
- 2.Trnková, V., Goralcík, P.: On products in generalized algebraic categories. Commentationes Mathematicae Universitatis Carolinae 10(1), 49–89 (1969)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 3.Adámek, J.: Limits and colimits in generalized algebraic categories. Czechoslovak Mathematical Journal 26(1), 55–64 (1976)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Hagino, T.: A Categorical Programming Language. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh (1987)Google Scholar
- 5.Poll, E., Zwanenburg, J.: From algebras and coalgebras to dialgebras. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 44(1), 289–307 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Rutten, J.J.M.M.: Universal coalgebra: a theory of systems. Theoretical Computer Science 249(1), 3–80 (2000)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Voutsadakis, G.: Universal dialgebra: unifying algebra and coalgebra. Far East Journal of Mathematical Sciences 44(1), 1–53 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 8.Madeira, A., Martins, M.A., Barbosa, L.: Models as arrows: the role of dialgebras. In: 7th Conference on Computability in Europe, Sofia, Bulgaria, pp. 144–153 (2011)Google Scholar
- 9.Ciancia, V.: Interaction and observation, categorically. In: 4th Interaction and Concurrency Experience. EPTCS, vol. 59, pp. 25–36 (2011)Google Scholar
- 10.Leifer, J.J., Milner, R.: Deriving bisimulation congruences for reactive systems. In: Palamidessi, C. (ed.) CONCUR 2000. LNCS, vol. 1877, pp. 243–258. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Sewell, P.: From rewrite rules to bisimulation congruences. Theoretical Computer Science 274, 183–230 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Sassone, V., Sobocinski, P.: Deriving bisimulation congruences using 2-categories. Nordic Journal of Computing 10(2), 163–186 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 13.Milner, R. (ed.): A Calculus of Communication Systems. LNCS, vol. 92. Springer, Heidelberg (1980)Google Scholar
- 14.Staton, S.: Relating coalgebraic notions of bisimulation. Logical Methods in Computer Science 7(1) (2011)Google Scholar
- 15.Milner, R., Parrow, J., Walker, D.: A Calculus of Mobile Processes, Part I. Information and Computation 100(1), 1–40 (1992)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Sangiorgi, D., Walker, D.: The π-Calculus: A Theory of Mobile Processes. Cambridge University Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
- 17.Turi, D., Plotkin, G.: Towards a mathematical operational semantics. In: 12th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS), pp. 280–291. IEEE (1997)Google Scholar
- 18.Blok, A.: Interaction, observation and denotation: A study of dialgebras for program semantics. Master’s thesis, University of Amsterdam (2012)Google Scholar