Abstract
Why is deciding simulation preorder (and simulation equivalence) computationally harder than deciding bisimulation equivalence on almost all known classes of processes? We try to answer this question by describing two general methods that can be used to construct direct one-to-one polynomial-time reductions from bisimulation equivalence to simulation preorder (and simulation equivalence). These methods can be applied to many classes of finitely generated transition systems, provided that they satisfy certain abstractly formulated conditions. Roughly speaking, our first method works for all classes of systems that can test for ‘non-enabledness’ of actions, while our second method works for all classes of systems that are closed under synchronization.
Supported by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic, grant No. 201/00/0400.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
P. A. Abdulla and B. Jonsson. Verifying programs with unreliable channels. In Proceedings of LICS’93, pages 160–170. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1993.
J. Balcázar, J. Gabarró, and M. Sántha. Deciding bisimilarity is P-complete. Formal Aspects of Computing, 4(6A):638–648, 1992.
J. A. Bergstra and J. W. Klop. Algebra of communicating processes with abstraction. Theoretical Computer Science, 37:77–121, 1985.
A. Bouajjani and R. Mayr. Model-checking lossy vector addition systems. In Proceedings of STACS’99, volume 1563 of LNCS, pages 323–333. Springer, 1999.
S. Christensen. Decidability and Decomposition in Process Algebras. PhD thesis, The University of Edinburgh, 1993.
P. Jančar, A. Kučera, and F. Moller. Simulation and bisimulation over onecounter processes. In Proceedings of STACS 2000, volume 1770 of LNCS, pages 334–345. Springer, 2000.
A. Kučera and R. Mayr. On the complexity of semantic equivalences for pushdown automata and BPA. In Proceedings of MFCS2002, LNCS. Springer, 2002. To appear.
A. Kučera and R. Mayr. Simulation preorder over simple process algebras. Information and Computation, 173(2):184–198, 2002.
R. Mayr. On the complexity of bisimulation problems for pushdown automata. In Proceedings of IFIP TCS’2000, volume 1872 of LNCS, pages 474–488. Springer, 2000.
F. Moller. Infinite results. In Proceedings of CONCUR’96, volume 1119 of LNCS, pages 195–216. Springer, 1996.
J. L. Peterson. Petri Net Theory and the Modelling of Systems. Prentice-Hall, 1981.
Z. Sawa and P. Jančar. P-hardness of equivalence testing on finite-state processes. In Proceedings of SOFSEM’2001, volume 2234 of LNCS, pages 326–335. Springer, 2001.
C. Stirling. The joys of bisimulation. In Proceedings of MFCS’98, volume 1450 of LNCS, pages 142–151. Springer, 1998.
W. Thomas. On the Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé game in theoretical computer science. In Proceedings of TAPSOFT’93, volume 668 of LNCS, pages 559–568. Springer, 1993.
R. van Glabbeek. The linear time-branching time spectrum. Handbook of Process Algebra, pages 3–99, 1999.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kučera, A., Mayr, R. (2002). Why Is Simulation Harder than Bisimulation?. In: Brim, L., Křetínský, M., Kučera, A., Jančar, P. (eds) CONCUR 2002 — Concurrency Theory. CONCUR 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2421. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45694-5_39
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45694-5_39
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-44043-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45694-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive