Skip to main content

On a Semantic Definition of Data Independence

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications (TLCA 2003)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2701))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

A variety of results which enable model checking of important classes of infinite-state systems are based on exploiting the property of data independence. The literature contains a number of definitions of variants of data independence, which are given by syntactic restrictions in particular formalisms. More recently, data independence was defined for labelled transition systems using logical relations, enabling results about data independent systems to be proved without reference to a particular syntax. In this paper, we show that the semantic definition is sufficiently strong for this purpose. More precisely, it was known that any syntactically data independent symbolic LTS denotes a semantically data independent family of LTSs, but here we show that the converse also holds.

We acknowledge support from the EPSRC Standard Research Grant ‘Exploiting Data Independence’, GR/M32900. A part of this research was done at the Oxford University Computing Laboratory.

Also affiliated to the Mathematical Institute, Belgrade. This author was supported in part by a grant from the Intel Corporation, a Junior Research Fellowship from Christ Church, Oxford, and previously by a scholarship from Hajrija & Boris Vukobrat and Copechim France SA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. M. Alimohamed. A characterization of lambda definability in categorical models of implicit polymorphism. Theoretical Computer Science, 146:5–23, 1995.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. J. Bohn, W. Damm, O. Grumberg, H. Hungar, and K. Laster. First-order-CTL model checking. In Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FST&TCS’98), volume 1530 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 283–294. Springer-Verlag, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. Calder and C. Shankland. A symbolic semantics and bisimulation for full LOTOS. In International Conference on Formal Description Techniques for Networked and Distributed Systems (FORTE’01), pages 184–200. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  4. K. M. Chandy and J. Misra. Parallel Program Design: A Foundation. Addison-Wesley, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  5. E. M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and D. A. Peled. Model Checking. MIT Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  6. D. Dill, R. Hojati, and R.K. Brayton. Verifying linear temporal properties of data intensive controllers using finite instantiations. In Hardware Description Languages and their Applications (CHDL’ 97). Chapman and Hall, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Fiore and A. Simpson. Lambda definability with sums via Grothendieck logical relations. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications (TLCA’99), volume 1581 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 147–161. Springer-Verlag, 1999.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. J. Goubault-Larrecq, S. Lasota, and D. Nowak. Logical relations for monadic types. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the European Association for Computer Science Logic (CSL’02), volume 2471 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 553-568. Springer-Verlag, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  9. M. Hennessy and H. Lin. Symbolic bisimulations. Theoretical Computer Science, 138(2):353–389, 1995.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. C. N. Ip and D. L. Dill. Better verification through symmetry. Formal Methods in System Design: An International Journal, 9(1/2):41–75, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Jeffrey. A fully abstract semantics for a higher-order functional language with nondeterministic computation. Theoretical Computer Science, 228:105–150, 1999.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. B. Jonsson and J. Parrow. Deciding bisimulation equivalences for a class of non-finite-state programs. Information and Computation, 107(2):272–302, 1993.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. A. Jung and J. Tiuryn. A new characterization of lambda definability. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications (TLCA’93), volume 664 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 245–257. Springer-Verlag, 1993.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. R. Lazić. A Semantic Study of Data Independence with Applications to Model Checking. DPhil thesis, Oxford University Computing Laboratory, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. Lazić and D. Nowak. A unifying approach to data-independence. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR 2000), volume 1877 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 581–595. Springer-Verlag, 2000.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. R. Lazić and D. Nowak. On a semantic definition of data independence. Research report 392, Department of Computer Science, University of Warwick, 2003. http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk.

  17. T. Nipkow. Non-deterministic data types: models and implementations. Acta Informatica, 22(6):629–661, 1986.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. G. D. Plotkin. Lambda-definability in the full type hierarchy. In To H. B. Curry: Essays on Combinatory Logic, Lambda Calculus and Formalism, pages 363–373. Academic Press, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  19. S. Qadeer. Verifying sequential consistency on shared-memory multiprocessors by model checking. Research Report 176, Compaq, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  20. R. Hojati and R. K. Brayton. Automatic datapath abstraction in hardware systems. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference On Computer Aided Verification, volume 939 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 98–113. Springer Verlag, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  21. J. C. Reynolds. Types, abstraction and parametric polymorphism. In Proceedings of the 9th IFIP World Computer Congress (IFIP’83), pages 513–523. North-Holland, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  22. A. W. Roscoe and P. J. Broadfoot. Proving security protocols with model checkers by data independence techniques. Journal of Computer Security, Special Issue on the 11th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop (CSFW11), pages 147–190, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  23. P. Wolper. Expressing interesting properties of programs in propositional temporal logic. In Conference Record of the 13th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 184–193. ACM, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lazić, R., Nowak, D. (2003). On a Semantic Definition of Data Independence. In: Hofmann, M. (eds) Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications. TLCA 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2701. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44904-3_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44904-3_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40332-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44904-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics