Advertisement

Communicating Timed Automata: The More Synchronous, the More Difficult to Verify

  • Pavel Krcal
  • Wang Yi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4144)

Abstract

We study channel systems whose behaviour (sending and receiving messages via unbounded FIFO channels) must follow given timing constraints specifying the execution speeds of the local components. We propose Communicating Timed Automata (CTA) to model such systems. The goal is to study the borderline between decidable and undecidable classes of channel systems in the timed setting. Our technical results include: (1) CTA with one channel without shared states in the form (A 1,A 2, c 1,2) is equivalent to one-counter machine, implying that verification problems such as checking state reachability and channel boundedness are decidable, and (2) CTA with two channels without sharing states in the form (A 1,A 2,A 3, c 1,2,c 2,3) has the power of Turing machines. Note that in the untimed setting, these systems are no more expressive than finite state machines. This shows that the capability of synchronizing on time makes it substantially more difficult to verify channel systems.

Keywords

Turing Machine Expressive Power Channel System Regular Language State Reachability 
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.

References

  1. [AD94]
    Alur, R., Dill, D.L.: A theory of timed automata. Theoretical Computer Science 126(2), 183–235 (1994)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [AJ96a]
    Abdulla, P.A., Jonsson, B.: Undecidable verification problems for programs with unreliable channels. Information and Computation 130(1), 71–90 (1996)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. [AJ96b]
    Abdulla, P.A., Jonsson, B.: Verifying programs with unreliable channels. Information and Computation 127(2), 91–101 (1996)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [BJLY98]
    Bengtsson, J., Jonsson, B., Lilius, J., Yi, W.: Partial order reductions for timed systems. In: Sangiorgi, D., de Simone, R. (eds.) CONCUR 1998. LNCS, vol. 1466, pp. 485–500. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [BZ83]
    Brand, D., Zafiropulo, P.: On communicating finite-state machines. J. ACM 30(2), 323–342 (1983)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. [CF05]
    Cécé, G., Finkel, A.: Verification of programs with half-duplex communication. Information and Computation 202(2), 166–190 (2005)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [CFP96]
    Cécé, G., Finkel, A., Iyer, S.P.: Unreliable channels are easier to verify than perfect channels. Information and Computation 124(1), 20–31 (1996)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. [FM97]
    Finkel, A., McKenzie, P.: Verifying identical communicating processes is undecidable. Theoretical Computer Science 174(1-2), 217–230 (1997)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. [FPS03]
    Finkel, A., Iyer, S.P., Sutre, G.: Well-abstracted transition systems: Application to FIFO automata. Information and Computation 181(1), 1–31 (2003)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. [GMK04]
    Genest, B., Muscholl, A., Kuske, D.: A Kleene theorem for a class of communicating automata with effective algorithms. In: Calude, C.S., Calude, E., Dinneen, M.J. (eds.) DLT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3340, pp. 30–48. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [KP05]
    Krčál, P., Pelánek, R.: On sampled semantics of timed systems. In: Ramanujam, R., Sen, S. (eds.) FSTTCS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3821, pp. 310–321. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [KY06]
    Krcal, P., Yi, W.: Communicating timed automata. Technical Report 2006-008, Uppsala University (2006)Google Scholar
  13. [Pac82]
    Pachl, J.K.: Reachability problems for communicating finite state machines. Technical Report CS-82-12, Department of Computer Science, University of Waterloo (1982)Google Scholar
  14. [Pac03]
    Pachl, J.K.: Reachability problems for communicating finite state machines. ArXiv Computer Science e-prints, arXiv:cs/0306121 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. [PP92]
    Peng, W., Iyer, S.P.: Analysis of a class of communicating finite state machines. Acta Informatica 29(6/7), 422–499 (1992)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pavel Krcal
    • 1
  • Wang Yi
    • 1
  1. 1.Uppsala UniversitySweden

Personalised recommendations