Fair processes

  • Agathe Merceron
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 266)


We study the notion of fairness in Petri Nets using processes, which are partially ordered sets, to describe their semantics. Processes do not contain more causality than the one specified in the marked net. We define, in a hierarchical way, transition-fair processes and marking-fair processes. Conspiracy phenomena may be encompassed by this hierarchical definition. We show that a process is transition-fair iff any of its associated occurrence sequence is transition-fair. We show that the hierarchy does not collapse in general for transition-fairness and that it does collapse for marking-fairness. Finally, implications between transition-fairness and marking-fairness are studied for three classes of marked nets.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    E. Best Fairness and Conspiracies. IPL Vol.18 pp.215–220 (1984)Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    E. Best and R. Devillier Sequential and Concurrent Behaviour in Petri Net Theory. To appear in Theoretical Computer Science (1987)Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    E. Best and C. Fernández Notations and Terminology on Petri Nets. Arbeitspapier der GMD 195, GMD, Postfach 1240, D-5205 St Augustin 1, also Petri Net Newsletter 23 (1986)Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    E. Best and A. Merceron Frozen Tokens and D-Continuity: A Study in Relating System Properties to Process properties. LNCS Vol.188 pp.48–61 (1985)Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    H. Carstensen Fairness Criteria that Guarantee Infinite Firing of Transitions. IFI-HH-M-109/83 Universitaet Hamburg (1983)Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    H. Carstensen and R. Valk Infinite Behaviours and Fairness in Petri Nets. LNCS Vol.188 pp.83–100 (1985)Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    F. Commoner, A.W. Holt, S. Even and A. Pnueli Marked directed graphs. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 5, pp.511–523 (1971)Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    C. Fernández and P.S. Thiagarajan A Lattice Theoretic View of K-density. LNCS Vol. 188 pp.139–163 (1985)Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    H.J. Genrich and K. Lautenbach Synchronisationsgraphen. Acta Informatica 2, pp.143–161 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    U. Goltz and W. Reisig The Non-Sequential Behaviours of Petri Nets. Information and Control Vol.57 Nos 2–3 pp.125–147 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    T. Murata and Z.H. Wu Fair Relation and Modified Synchronic Distances in a Petri Net. Journal of the Franklin Institute Vol. 320 No.2 pp.63–82 (1985)Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    J.P. Queille and J. Sifakis Fairness ane Related Properties in Transitions Systems A Time Logic to Deal with Fairness. R.R. 292 CNRS Université Scientifique et Médicale de Grenoble (1982)Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    W. Reisig On the semantics of Petri Nets. In: Formal Models in Programming Ed: E.J. Neuhold and G. Chroust North Holland pp.347–372 (1985)Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    W. Reisig A Strong Part of Concurrency. In this volume.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    R. Valk Infinite Behaviour of Petri Nets. Theoretical Computer Science Vol.25 pp.311–341 (1983)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Agathe Merceron
    • 1
  1. 1.GMD-F1PSt.Augustin 1Federal Republic of Germany

Personalised recommendations