Operational Determinism and Fast Algorithms
The main contribution of this work is a fast algorithm for checking whether a labelled transition system (LTS) is operationally deterministic. Operational determinism is a condition on the LTS designed to capture the notion of “deterministic behaviour” without ruling out invisible actions and divergence, and without strictly devoting oneself to any single process-algebraic semantics. Indeed, we show that in the case of operationally deterministic LTSs, all divergence-sensitive equivalences between divergence-sensitive branching bisimilarity and trace + divergence trace equivalence collapse to the same equivalence. The running time of the algorithm is linear except a term that, roughly speaking, grows as slowly as Ackermann’s function grows quickly. If the original LTS is operationally deterministic, the algorithm produces as a by-product a structurally deterministic LTS that is divergence-sensitive branching bisimilar to the original one. This LTS can be minimised like a deterministic finite automaton. The overall approach is so cheap that it makes almost always sense to first try it and revert to a semantics-specific reduction or minimisation algorithm only if the LTS proves operationally nondeterministic.
KeywordsFast Algorithm Label Transition System Structural Determinism Bottom State Divergence Trace
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Blom, S., Orzan, S.: Distributed branching bisimulation reduction of state spaces. In: PDMC 2003, Parallel and Distributed Model Checking (Satellite workshop of CAV 2003). ENTCS, vol. 89(1), pp. 99–113. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
- 4.Eloranta, J.: Minimal Transition Systems with Respect to Divergence Preserving Behavioural Equivalences. PhD thesis, University of Helsinki (1994)Google Scholar
- 7.Roscoe, A.W.: CSP and determinism in security modelling. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 114–127. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1995)Google Scholar
- 8.Roscoe, A.W.: The Theory and Practice of Concurrency, p. 565. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1998)Google Scholar
- 9.Ryan, P.Y.A., Schneider, S.A.: Process algebra and non-interference. In: Proceedings of Computer Security Foundations Workshop, pp. 214–227. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
- 10.Van Glabbeek, R.J.: The linear time – branching time spectrum II; the semantics of sequential systems with silent moves. In: Best, E. (ed.) CONCUR 1993. LNCS, vol. 715, pp. 66–81. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)Google Scholar