Design and proof of communicating sequential processes

  • E. Pascal Gribomont
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 259)


An old principle connecting concurrent processes with sequential non-deterministic ones is revisited. Associated with a transformation technique, it leads to a methodology for an incremental design and verification of CSP networks. The starting point is a non-deterministic program. This program and its invariant are transformed step by step into a CSP network, without introducing new variables. The methodology is illustrated by the synthesis of a simple solution to the mutual exclusion problem.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Apt80]
    K.R. APT, N. FRANCEZ and W.P. DDE ROEVER, “A Proof System for Communicating Sequential Processes”, ACM Toplas, vol. 2, pp. 359–385, 1980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [Apt86]
    K.R. APT, “Correctness Proofs of Distributed Termination Algorithms”, ACM Toplas, vol. 8, pp. 388–405, 1986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [Ash70]
    E.A. ASHCROFT and Z. MANNA, “Formalization of Properties of Parallel Programs”, Machine Intelligence, vol. 6, pp. 17–41, 1970Google Scholar
  4. [Cha86]
    M. CHANDY and J. MISRA, “An Example of Stepwise Refinement of Distributed Programs: Quiescence Detection”, ACM Toplas, vol. 8, pp. 326–343, 1986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [Dij78]
    E.W. DIJKSTRA and al., “On-the-Fly Garbage Collection: An Exercise in Cooperation”, CACM, vol. 21, pp. 966–975, 1978Google Scholar
  6. [Ger84]
    R. GERTH and W.P. DE ROEVER, “A proof system for concurrent ADA programs”, SCP, vol. 4, pp. 159–204, 1984Google Scholar
  7. [Grb85]
    P. GRIBOMONT, “Méthode progressive de synthèse et de vérification de programmes parallèles”, thèse de doctorat, université de Liège, 1985Google Scholar
  8. [Gri77]
    D. GRIES, “An exercise in Proving Parallel Programs Correct”, CACM, vol. 20, pp. 921–930, 1977Google Scholar
  9. [Hoa78]
    C.A.R. HOARE, “Communicating Sequential Processes”, CACM, vol. 21, pp. 666–677, 1978Google Scholar
  10. [Lam83]
    L. LAMPORT, “An Assertional Correctness Proof of a Distributed Algorithm”, SCP, vol. 2, pp. 175–206, 1983Google Scholar
  11. [MaP84]
    Z. MANNA and A. PNUELI, “Adequate proof principles for invariance and liveness properties of concurrent programs”, SCP, vol. 4, pp. 257–289, 1984Google Scholar
  12. [MaW84]
    Z. MANNA and P.L. WOLPER, “Synthesis of Communicating Processes from Temporal Logic Specifications”, ACM Toplas, vol. 6, pp. 68–93, 1984Google Scholar
  13. [May83]
    D. MAY, “OCCAM”, ACM Sigplan Notices, vol. 18, pp. 69–79, 1983Google Scholar
  14. [Mis81]
    J. MISRA and K.M. CHANDY, “Proofs of Networks of Processes”, IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, vol. SE-7, pp. 417–426, 1981Google Scholar
  15. [Moi85]
    A. MOITRA, “Automatic construction of CSP programs from sequential non-deterministic programs”, SCP, vol. 5, pp. 277–307, 1985Google Scholar
  16. [Owi76]
    S. OWICKI and D. GRIES, “An Axiomatic Proof Technique for Parallel programs”, Acta Informatica, vol. 6, pp 319–340, 1976CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Pascal Gribomont
    • 1
  1. 1.Philips Research LaboratoryBrussels

Personalised recommendations