Trace- and Failure-Based Semantics for Bounded Responsiveness

  • Walter Vogler
  • Christian Stahl
  • Richard Müller
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 393)


We study open systems modeled as Petri nets with an interface for asynchronous communication with other open systems. As a minimal requirement for successful communication, we investigate bounded responsiveness, which guarantees that an open system and its environment always have the possibility to communicate, while the number of pending messages never exceeds a previously known bound. Bounded responsiveness accordance describes when one open system can be safely replaced by another open system. We present a trace-based characterization for accordance. As this relation turns out not to be compositional (i.e., it is no precongruence), we characterize the coarsest compositional relation (i.e., the coarsest precongruence) that is contained in this relation, using a variation of should testing, and show decidability.


Successful Communication Asynchronous Communication Bounded Responsiveness Output Place Unbounded Variant 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Acciai, L., Boreale, M.: Responsiveness in process calculi. Theor. Comp. Sci. 409(1), 59–93 (2008)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akyildiz, I., Su, W., Sankarasubramaniam, Y., Cayirci, E.: Wireless sensor networks: a survey. Computer Networks 38(4), 393–422 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bravetti, M., Zavattaro, G.: A foundational theory of contracts for multi-party service composition. Fundam. Inform. 89(4), 451–478 (2008)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brookes, S.D., Hoare, C.A.R., Roscoe, A.W.: A theory of communicating sequential processes. J. ACM 31(3), 560–599 (1984)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Desai, A., Gupta, V., Jackson, E., Qadeer, S., Rajamani, S.K., Zufferey, D.: P: safe asynchronous event-driven programming. In: PLDI 2013, pp. 321–332. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gamboni, M., Ravara, A.: Responsive choice in mobile processes. In: Wirsing, M., Hofmann, M., Rauschmayer, A. (eds.) TGC 2010, LNCS, vol. 6084, pp. 135–152. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van Glabbeek, R.J.: The coarsest precongruences respecting safety and liveness properties. In: Calude, C.S., Sassone, V. (eds.) TCS 2010. IFIP AICT, vol. 323, pp. 32–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kobayashi, N.: A type system for lock-free processes. Information and Computation 177(2), 122–159 (2002)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lohmann, N., Massuthe, P., Wolf, K.: Operating guidelines for finite-state services. In: Kleijn, J., Yakovlev, A. (eds.) ICATPN 2007. LNCS, vol. 4546, pp. 321–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lohmann, N., Verbeek, E., Dijkman, R.: Petri net transformations for business processes – A survey. In: Jensen, K., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency II. LNCS, vol. 5460, pp. 46–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lohmann, N., Wolf, K.: Compact representations and efficient algorithms for operating guidelines. Fundam. Inform. 107, 1–19 (2011)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Malik, R., Streader, D., Reeves, S.: Conflicts and fair testing. Journal of Foundations of Computer Science 17(4), 797–813 (2006)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mooij, A.J., Stahl, C., Voorhoeve, M.: Relating fair testing and accordance for service replaceability. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 79(3-5), 233–244 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Müller, R.: On the notion of deadlocks in open nets. In: AWPN 2010. CEUR WS Proc., vol. 643, pp. 130–135 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Papazoglou, M.P.: Web Services: Principles and Technology. Pearson (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reed, J.N., Roscoe, A.W., Sinclair, J.E.: Responsiveness and stable revivals. Formal Asp. Comput. 19(3), 303–319 (2007)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rensink, A., Vogler, W.: Fair testing. Inf. Comput. 205(2), 125–198 (2007)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stahl, C., Vogler, W.: A trace-based service semantics guaranteeing deadlock freedom. Acta Inf. 49(2), 69–103 (2012)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vogler, W.: Modular Construction and Partial Order Semantics of Petri Nets. LNCS, vol. 625. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vogler, W., Stahl, C., Müller, R.: A trace-based semantics for responsiveness. In: ACSD 2012, pp. 42–51. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wolf, K.: Does my service have partners? In: Jensen, K., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) ToPNoC II. LNCS, vol. 5460, pp. 152–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Walter Vogler
    • 1
  • Christian Stahl
    • 2
  • Richard Müller
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Institut für InformatikUniversität AugsburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceTechnische Universiteit EindhovenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Institut für InformatikHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations