Infinite behaviour and fairness in concurrent constraint programming

  • Marta Kwiatkowska
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 666)


In concurrent constraint programming, divergence (i.e. an infinite computation) and failure are often identified. This is undesirable when modelling systems in which infinite behaviour arises naturally. This paper sets out a framework for an axiomatic and denotational view of concurrent constraint programming, and considers the relationship of both views as an instance of Stone duality. We propose a construction of a constraint system which allows both finite and infinite constraints. Subsequently, we provide semantic, topological definitions of safety, liveness and fairness properties in a given constraint system. The process language considered is parametrized by the constraint system. It allows the actions ask and tell, the prefix operator →, the (angelic) non-deterministic choice operator ⊕, the procedure call p(X), and the concurrency operator ∥.


concurrent constraint programming liveness fairness semantic properties 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    S. Abramsky. Domain theory in logical form. In Proceedings, Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 47–53. IEEE CS, 1987.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. Abramsky. Domain theory in logical form. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 51:1–77, 1991.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    B. Davey and H. Priestley. Introduction to Lattices and Order. Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    F. de Boer and C. Palamidessi. A fully abstract model for concurrent constraint programming. In S. Abramsky and T. Maibaum, editors, Proc. of TAPSOFT/CAAP, volume 493 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 296–319. Springer-Verlag, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    N. Francez. Fairness. Springer-Verlag, 1986.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    G. Gierz, K. Hofmann, K. Keimel, J. Lawson, M. Mislove, and D. Scott. A Compendium of Continuous Lattices. Springer-Verlag, 1980.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    C. Gunter and D. Scott. Semantic domains. In J. van Leeuwen, editor, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier Science Publishers, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. Jagadeesan, V. A. Saraswat, and V. Shanbogue. Angelic non-determinism in concurrent constraint programming. Technical report, System Sciences Laboratory, Xerox PARC, 1991.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    P. T. Johnstone. Stone Spaces. Cambridge University Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    M. Z. Kwiatkowska. Event fairness and non-interleaving concurrency. Formal Aspects of Computing, 1(3):213–228, 1989.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    M. Z. Kwiatkowska. Survey of fairness notions. Information and Software Technology, 31(7):371–386, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Z. Kwiatkowska. Defining process fairness for non-interleaving concurrency. In K. Nori and Veni-Madhavan, editors, Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science, volume 472 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 286–300. Springer-Verlag, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    M. Z. Kwiatkowska. On topological characterization of behavioural properties. In G. Reed, A. Roscoe, and R. Wachter, editors, Topology and Category Theory in Computer Science, pages 153–177. Oxford University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    L. Lamport. Proving the correctness of multiprocess programs. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-3(2):125–143, 1977.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. A hierarchy of temporal properties. In Proceedings, 9th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 377–408. ACM Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    D. Park. Concurrency and automata on infinite sequences. In P. Deussen, editor, Theoretical Computer Science, volume 104 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 167–183. Springer-Verlag, 1981.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    G. D. Plotkin. Post-graduate lecture notes in advanced domain theory. Incorporating the “Pisa Notes”, 1981.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    V. Saraswat and M. Rinard. Concurrent constraint programming. In Proc. of the seventeenth ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 232–245. ACM, New York, 1990.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    V. Saraswat, M. Rinard, and P. Panangaden. A fully abstract semantics for concurrent constraint programming. In Proc. of the eighteenth ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. ACM, New York, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    H. Simmons. Frames: the point-free approach to topology. Lecture notes for a Logic for IT course, 1989.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    M. B. Smyth. Powerdomains and predicate transformers: A topological view. In Automata, Languages and Programming, volume 154 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, 1983.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    S. Vickers. Topology via Logic, volume 5 of Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science. Cambridge University Press, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marta Kwiatkowska
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of LeicesterLeicester

Personalised recommendations