Advertisement

An Adequate Logic for Full LOTOS

  • Muffy Calder
  • Savi Maharaj
  • Carron Shankland
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2021)

Abstract

We present a novel result for a logic for symbolic transition systems based on LOTOS processes. The logic is adequate with respect to bisimulation defined on symbolic transition systems.

Keywords

Modal Logic Transition System Free Variable Label Transition System Boolean Expression 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. Amyot, L. Char et al. Feature Description and Feature Interaction Analysis with Use Case Maps and LOTOS. In M. Calder and E. Magill, editors, Feature Interactions in Telecommunications and Software Systems VI. IOS Press, May 2000.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Becht, A. Bloesch et al. Ergo 4.1 Reference Manual. Technical Report 96-31, Software Verification Research Centre, University of Queensland, Australia, November 1996Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Calder, S. Maharaj, and C. Shankland. A Modal Logic for Early Symbolic Transition Systems. The Computer Journal, 2001. To appear.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Calder and C. Shankland. A Symbolic Semantics and Bisimulation for Full LOTOS. To appear as a University of Stirling Technical Report, 2000.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Clavel, F. Duran et al. Maude: Specification and Programming in Rewriting Logic. Maude System documentation. Computer Science Laboratory, SRI, Menlo Park, California, March 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J-C. Fernandez, H. Garavel et al. CADP (CAESAR/ALDEBARAN Development Package): A Protocol Validation and Verification Toolbox. In R. Alur and T.A. Henzinger, editors, Proceedings of CAV’96, number 1102 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 437–440. Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J.F. Groote and R. Mateescu. Verification of Temporal Properties of Processes in a Setting with Data. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology AMAST’98, Amazonia, Brazil, volume 1548 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 74–90, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J.F. Groote and A. Ponse. The Syntax and Semantics of µ-CRL. In Proceedings of Algebra of Communicating Processes, Utrecht 1994, Workshops in Computing. Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Hennessy and H. Lin. Symbolic Bisimulations. Theoretical Computer Science, 138:353–389, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Hennessy and X. Liu. A Modal Logic for Message Passing Processes. Acta Informatica, 32:375–393, 1995.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Hennessy and R. Milner. Algebraic Laws for Nondeterminism and Concurrency. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 32(1):137–161, 1985.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    International Organisation for Standardisation. Information Processing Systems–Open Systems Interconnection–LOTOS–A Formal Description Technique Based on the Temporal Ordering of Observational Behaviour, 1988.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Kirkwood. Specifying Properties of Basic LOTOS Processes Using Temporal Logic. In G. v Bochmann, R. Dssouli, and O. Rafiq, editors, Formal Description Techniques, VIII, IFIP. Chapman Hall, April 1996.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Kozen. Results on the Propositional µ-Calculus. Theoretical Computer Science, 27:333–354, 1983.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. Mateescu and H. Garavel. XTL: A Meta-Language and Tool for Temporal Logic Model-Checking. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Software Tools for Technology Transfer STTT’98 (Aalborg, Denmark), 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Pecheur. Using LOTOS for specifying the CHORUS distributed operating system kernel. Computer Communications, 15(2):93–102, March 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Sighireanu and R. Mateescu.Verification of the Link Layer Protocol of the IEEE-1394 Serial Bus (FireWire): an Experiment with E-LOTOS. Springer International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT), 2(1):68–88, Dec. 1998.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. Stirling. Temporal Logics for CCS. In J.W. de Bakker, W.-P. de Roever, and G. Rozenberg, editors, Linear Time, Branching Time and Partial Order in Logics and Models for Concurrency, LNCS 354, pages 660–672. Springer-Verlag, 1989. REX School /Workshop, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands, May/June 1988.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Thomas. The Story of the Therac-25 in LOTOS. High Integrity Systems Journal, 1(1):3–15, 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Thomas. Modelling and Analysing User Views of Telecommunications Services. In Feature Interactions in Telecommunications Systems, pages 168–183. IOS Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Thomas and B. Ormsby. On the Design of Side-Stick Controllers in Fly-by-Wire Aircraft. A.C.M. Applied Computing Review, 2(1):15–20, Spring 1994.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kenneth J. Turner. An architectural description of intelligent network features and their interactions. Computer Networks, 30(15):1389–1419, September 1998.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    A. Vogel. On ODP’s architectural semantics using LOTOS. In J. de Meer, B. Mahr, and O. Spaniol, editors, Proc. Int. Conf. on Open Distributed Processing, pages 340–345, September 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muffy Calder
    • 1
  • Savi Maharaj
    • 2
  • Carron Shankland
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computing ScienceUniversity of GlasgowGlasgowUK
  2. 2.Department of Computing Science and MathematicsUniversity of StirlingStirlingUK

Personalised recommendations