A Denotational Semantics for Parameterised Networks of Synchronised Automata

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10134)

Abstract

Parameterised Networks of Synchronised Automata (pNets) is a machine-oriented semantic formalism used for specifying and verifying the behaviour of distributed components or systems. In addition, it can be used to define the semantics of languages in the parallel and distributed computation area. Unlike other traditional process calculi, pNets only own one pNet node as an operator which composes all subnets running in parallel. Using this single synchronisation artifact, it is capable of expressing many operators or synchronisation mechanisms. In this paper, we explore a denotational semantics for parameterised networks. The denotational semantics of parameterised networks we investigate is based on the behaviours of their subnets. The behaviour of a subnet is determined by both its state and the actions it executes. Based on the traces of a set of subnets, the behaviour of a pNet consisting of those subnets can be deduced. A set of algebraic laws is also explored based on the denotational semantics.

References

  1. 1.
    Arnold, A.: Finite Transition Systems - Semantics of Communicating Systems. Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barros, T., Ameur-Boulifa, R., Cansado, A., Henrio, L., Madelaine, E.: Behavioural models for distributed fractal components. Ann. des Télécommun. 64(1–2), 25–43 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baude, F., Caromel, D., Dalmasso, C., Danelutto, M., Getov, V., Henrio, L., Pérez, C.: GCM: a grid extension to fractal for autonomous distributed components. Ann. des Télécommun. 64(1–2), 5–24 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Henrio, L., Madelaine, E., Zhang, M.: pNets: an expressive model for parameterised networks of processes. In: 23rd Euromicro International Conference on Parallel, Distributed, and Network-Based Processing, PDP 2015, Turku, Finland, March 4–6, 2015, pp. 492–496 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Henrio, L., Madelaine, E., Zhang, M.: A theory for the composition of concurrent processes. In: Albert, E., Lanese, I. (eds.) FORTE 2016. LNCS, vol. 9688, pp. 175–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-39570-8_12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoare, C.A.R., He, J.: Unifying Theories of Programming. Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1998)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koymans, R., Shyamasundar, R., de Roever, W., Gerth, R., Arun-Kumar, S.: Compositional semantics for real-time distributed computing. Inf. Comput. 79(3), 210–256 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River (1989)MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nierstrasz, O.: Piccola - a small composition language. In: Object-Oriented Technology, ECOOP 1999, Workshop Reader, ECOOP 1999 Workshops, Panels, and Posters, Lisbon, Portugal, June 14–18, 1999, Proceedings, p. 317 (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rajan, A., Bavan, S., Abeysinghe, G.: Semantics for a distributed programming language using SACS and weakest pre-conditions. In: International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communications, ADCOM 2006, pp. 434–439, December 2006Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schmitt, A., Stefani, J.-B.: The Kell calculus: a family of higher-order distributed process calculi. In: Priami, C., Quaglia, P. (eds.) GC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3267, pp. 146–178. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-31794-4_9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Shanghai Key Laboratory of Trustworthy ComputingECNUShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Université Côte d’Azur, INRIA, I3SSophia AntipolisFrance

Personalised recommendations