Limits of Agents in Process Calculus

  • Mingsheng Ying
Part of the The International Series on Asian Studies in Computer and Information Science book series (ASIS, volume 6)


Various behaviour equivalences are central notions in process calculus and in applications of process calculus, specification and implementation are expressed as two agents and correctness of programs is treated as a certain behaviour equivalence between specification and implementation. But many implementations can only approximate their formal definition of semantics and behaviour equivalences are not suitable concepts to characterize the mechanism of approximation of programs. As an attempt devoted to provide some useful tools for the understanding and analysis of approximate correctness of programs in concurrent systems, in this paper, we present a theory of limits of agents in process calculus. First, the concepts of strong and weak bisimulation limits and trace limits of agents are introduced and they may be used to describe evolution of softwares. Secondly, continuity of various combinators in process calculus with respect to these notions of limits are shown. A complex concurrent system always consists of several subsystems. Whenever this system needs to be revised step by step to reach a certain requirement, we hope to do this in a structural (or modular) way, i.e., we would like to revise it component by component. The result in regard to continuity of combinators puts this intuitive idea on a firm basis. Thirdly, we demonstrate that strong and weak bisimulation limits preserve determinacy and confluency of agents.


Process calculus bisimulation trace semantic equivalence net limit continuity determinacy confluency solution of equation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Kelley, J. L. General Topology. van Nostrand, New York, 1955.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Maclane, S. Categories for the Working Mathematician. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1971.Google Scholar
  3. Milner, R. A Calculus of Communicating Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 92, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Milner, R. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall. New York, 1989.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Takeuti, G.; Zaring, W. M. Introduction to Axiomatic Set Theory. Springer-Verlag, New York, Second Edition, 1982.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Winskel, G.; Nielsen, M. Models for concurrency. In Handbook of Logic in Computer Science,vol.4: Semantic Modelling, S. Abramsky, Dov M. Gabby and T. S. E. Maibaum, eds. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995, 1–139.Google Scholar
  7. Ying, M. S. A logic for approximate reasoning. J. Symbolic Logic 59, 1994, 830–837.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ying, M. S. Near bisimulations defined by closures, submitting, 1998a.Google Scholar
  9. Ying, M. S. Bisimulation indexes induced by metrics on actions, submitting, 1998b.Google Scholar
  10. Ying, M. S. Topology in process calculus (I): Limit behaviour of agents. J. Computer Sci. & Technol. 14, 1999c.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mingsheng Ying
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Intelligent Technology and Systems, Department of Computer Science and TechnologyTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations