Model Feasible Interactions in Distributed Real-Time Systems

  • Shangping Ren
  • Yue Yu
  • Miao Song
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7000)

Abstract

When a distributed system contains only causal relations from input events to output events, an interaction diagram (id) provides a convenient mechanism to study observable behaviors of the system as all events can be mapped to a set of global times that preserve the initial causal relations. However, the interaction diagram focuses only on causal orders among distributed events, which is not sufficient for most real-time applications. Furthermore, in real-time context, a feasible interaction is the one that satisfies not only causal constraints and precedence constraints, but also real-time constraints. However, feasibility checking for a given set of real-time constraints is asymptotically harder than for causal or precedence constraints. In this paper, we first extend the interaction diagram with precedence constraints and develop a mechanism that allows order preserving composition of the extended interaction diagram (eid) with timing constraint graph (tcg). The composition of the extended interaction diagram and timing constraining graph is called timed interaction diagram (tid). To reduce the time complexity differences between the two different feasibility checkings, event bundling is introduced to partition timed interaction diagrams. We show that a lattice of bundled interaction diagrams (bid) can be derived from a given timed interaction diagram to improve the efficiency of feasibility checking for arbitrary real-time constraints.

Keywords

Precedence Constraint Global Time Input Event Constraint Graph Interaction Diagram 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Agha, G.: Actors: a model of concurrent computation in distributed systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (1986)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agha, G., Mason, I.A., Smith, S.F., Talcott, C.L.: Towards a theory of actor computation. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) CONCUR 1992. LNCS, vol. 630, pp. 565–579. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Agha, G.A., Mason, I.A., Smith, S.F., Talcott, C.L.: A foundation for actor computation. J. Funct. Program. 7, 1–72 (1997), http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=969900.969901
  4. 4.
    Agha, G.A., Thati, P., Ziaei, R.: Actors: a model for reasoning about open distributed systems, pp. 155–176. Cambridge University Press, New York (2001), http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=566795.566806
  5. 5.
    Arbab, F.: Abstract behavior types: a foundation model for components and their composition. Science of Computer Programming 55(1-3), 3–52 (2005), formal Methods for Components and Objects: Pragmatic aspects and applicationsGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clinger, W.D.: Foundations of Actor Semantics. Ph.D. thesis (1981), aI-TR-633Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cormen, T.H., Stein, C., Rivest, R.L., Leiserson, C.E.: Introduction to Algorithms, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Higher Education (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jiang, J., Wu, J.: The preservation of interleaving equivalences. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, pp. 580–589. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee, C.G., Mok, A.K., Konana, P.: Monitoring of timing constraints with confidence threshold requirements. IEEE Trans. Comput. 56, 977–991 (2007), http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TC.2007.1026
  10. 10.
    Lee, E.A.: Concurrent semantics without the notions of state or state transitions. In: Asarin, E., Bouyer, P. (eds.) FORMATS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4202, pp. 18–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mason, I.A., Talcott, C.L.: Actor languages. their syntax, semantics, translation, and equivalence. Theor. Comput. Sci. 220, 409–467 (1999), http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=308049.308053
  12. 12.
    Mok, A.K., Liu, G.: Efficient run-time monitoring of timing constraints. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium (RTAS 1997), p. 252. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (1997), http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=523983.828388
  13. 13.
    Raju, S., Rajkumar, R., Jahanian, F.: Monitoring timing constraints in distributed real-time systems. In: Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1992, pp. 57–67 (December 1992)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ren, S., Yu, Y., Chen, N., Marth, K., Poirot, P.-E., Shen, L.: Actors, roles and coordinators! a coordination model for open distributed and embedded systems. In: Ciancarini, P., Wiklicky, H. (eds.) COORDINATION 2006. LNCS, vol. 4038, pp. 247–265. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Talcott, C.L.: Interaction semantics for components of distributed systems. In: 1st IFIP Workshop on Formal Methods for Open Object-based Distributed Systems, FMOODS 1996 (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Talcott, C.L.: Composable semantic models for actor theories. Higher Order Symbol. Comput. 11, 281–343 (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yu, Y., Ren, S., Frieder, O.: Prediction of timing constraint violation for real-time embedded systems with known transient hardware failure distribution model. In: 27th IEEE International on Real-Time Systems Symposium, RTSS 2006, p. 454–466 (December 2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shangping Ren
    • 1
  • Yue Yu
    • 1
  • Miao Song
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentIllinois Institute of TechnologyChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations