Advertisement

Communicating finite state machines with priority channels

  • M. G. Gouda
  • L. E. Rosier
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 172)

Abstract

Consider a network of two communicating finite state machines which exchange messages over two one-directional, unbounded channels, and assume that each machine receives the messages from its input channel based on some fixed (partial) priority relation. We address the problem of whether the communication of such a network is deadlock-free and bounded. We show that the problem is undecidable if the two machines exchange two types of messages. The problem is also undecidable if the two machines exchange three types of messages, and one of the channels is known to be bounded. However, if the two machines exchange two (or less) types of messages, and one channel is known to be bounded, then the problem becomes decidable. The problem is also decidable if one machine sends one type of message and the second machine sends two (or less) types of messages; the problem becomes undecidable if the second machine sends three types of messages. The problem is also decidable if the message priority relation is empty. We also address the problem of whether there is a message priority relation such that the priority network behaves like a FIFO network. We show that the problem is undecidable in general, and present some special cases for which the problem becomes decidable.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

8. References

  1. 1.
    Bochmann, G., Finite State Description of Communication Protocols, Computer Networks, Vol. 2, 1978, pp.361–371.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brand, D. and Zafiropulo, P., On Communicating Finite-State Machines, J. ACM, Vol. 30, No. 2, April 1983, pp. 323–342.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cunha, P. and Maibaum, T., A Synchronization Calculus for Message-Oriented Programming, Proc. 2nd International Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, April 1981, pp. 433–445.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gouda, M., Manning, E. and Yu, Y., On the Progress of Communication between Two Finite State Machines, University of Texas, Department of Computer Sciences, Tech. Rep. No. 200, May 1982, revised August 1983.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gouda, M. and Rosier, L., Priority Networks for Communicating Finite State Machines, Technical Report TR 83-10, Dept. of Computer Sciences, Univ. of Texas at Austin, August 1983. Submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hack, M., Decidability Questions for Petri Nets, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Electrical Engineering, MIT, 1975.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hopcroft, J. and Ullman, J., "Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation", Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1979.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ibarra, O., Reversal-Bounded Multicounter Machines and their Decision Problems, J. ACM, Vol. 25, No. 1, 1978, pp. 116–133.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ibarra, O. and Rosier, L., On Restricted One-Counter Machines, Math. Systems Theory, Vol. 14, 1981, pp. 241–245.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karp, R. and Miller, R., Parallel Program Schemata, J. of Computer and System Sciences, Vol. 3, No.2, 1969, pp.147–195.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kosaraju, S., Decidability of Reachability in Vector Addition Systems, Proc. of the 14th Annual ACM Symp. on the Theory of Computing, 1982, pp. 267–281.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mayr, E., An Algorithm for the General Petri Net Reachability Problem, Proc. of the 13th Annual ACM Symp. on the Theory of Computing, 1981, pp. 238–246.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Merlin, P. and Bochmann, G., On the Construction of Communication Protocols and Module Specification, Pub. 352, Dept. dinformatique de recherche op' erationnelle, Universit'e de Montreal, January 1980.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Minsky, M., "Computation: Finite and Infinite Machines", Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1967.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Peterson, J., "Petri Net Theory and the Modeling of Systems", Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1981.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rackoff, C., The Covering and Boundedness Problems for Vector Addition Systems, Theor. Comput. Sci., Vol. 6, 1978, pp. 223–231.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosier, L. and Gouda, M., On Deciding Progress for a Class of Communication Protocols, in Proc. of the Eighteenth Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems, Princeton Univ., 1984.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sacerdote, G. and Tenney, R., The Decidability of the Reachability Problem for Vector Addition Systems, Proc. of the 9th Annual ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, 1977, pp. 61–76.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Savitch, W., Relationships between Nondeterministic and Deterministic Tape Complexities, J. of Computer and System Sciences, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1970, pp. 177–192.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tannenbaum, A., "Computer Networks", Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1981.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Valiant, L. and Paterson, M., Deterministic One-Counter Automata, J. of Computer and System Sciences, Vol. 10, 1975, pp. 340–350.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yu, Y. and Gouda, M., Deadlock Detection for a Class of Communicating Finite State Machines, IEEE Trans. on Comm., Vol. COM-30, No. 12, December 1982, pp. 2514–2518.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yu. Y. and Gouda, M., Unboundedness Detection for a Class of Communicating Finite State Machines, to appear in Information Processing Letters.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zafiropulo, P., et. al., Towards Analyzing and Synthesizing Protocols, IEEE Trans. on Comm., Vol. COM-28, No. 4, April 1980, pp. 651–661.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. G. Gouda
    • 1
  • L. E. Rosier
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer SciencesUniversity of Texas at AustinUSA

Personalised recommendations