Many real systems consist of a number of physically distributed components that work independently using their private storage, but also communicate from time to time by explicit message passing. Such systems are called distributed systems. An example is an airline reservation system consisting of a large number of terminals in many different travel agencies and a central data base for keeping the current status of all flights. Here the data base and the terminals are the components of the system, and communication is possible between each terminal and the data base.
KeywordsProof System Main Loop Proof Theory Total Correctness Partial Correctness
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- [BF88]L. Bougé and N. Francez. A compositional approach to superimposition. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 240–249, San Diego, CA, 1988.Google Scholar
- [BKS88]R.J.R. Back and R. Kurki-Suonio. Serializability in distributed systems with handshaking. In T. Lepistö and A. Salomaa, editors, Proceedings of International Colloquium on Automata Languages and Programming (ICALP ‘88),pages 52–66, New York, 1988. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 317, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- [FR82]N. Francez and M. Rodeh. Achieving distributed termination without freezing. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-8(3): 287–292, 1982.Google Scholar
- [FRS81]N. Francez, M. Rodeh, and M. Sintzoff. Distributed termination with interval assertions. In J. Diaz, editor, Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Formalization of Programming Concepts (EATCS), Penniscola, Spain,New York, 1981. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 107, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- [GFK84]O. Grumberg, N. Francez, and S. Katz. Fair termination of communicating processes. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM SIGACT Conference on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pages 254–265, Vancouver, Canada, August 1984.Google Scholar
- [HR86]J. Hooman and W.P. de Roever. The quest goes on: a survey of proofsystems for partial correctness of CSP. In Current Trends in Concurrency,pages 343–395, New York, 1986. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 224, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- [Kat87]S. Katz. A superimposition control construct for distributed systems. Technical Report STP268–87, MCC, Austin, TX, 1987.Google Scholar
- [O1d91]E.-R. Olderog. Correctness proof of a CSP program transformation. 1991. In preparation.Google Scholar
- [P1o82]G.D. Plotkin. An operational semantics for CSP. In D. Bjorner, editor, Formal Description of Programming Concepts II, pages 199–225, Amsterdam, 1982. North-Holland.Google Scholar