Safe implementation equivalence for asynchronous nondeterministic processes

  • B. Gamatie
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 233)


intuitively, processes can be seen as objects which cannot do anything, but communicate (either internally or externally). Hence, they can be entirely specified, using only communication relations. Similarly, process equivalence relations, usually rely on communication relations exclusively. That is, the unique way for defining their equivalence, turns out to be the only means processes have in order to influence their environment. Therefore, it seems quite natural to insist that process equivalence relations be congruence relations. Moreover, such relations must characterize machine behaviours in such a way that they correspond to the intuitive meaning they usually have. Unfortunately this is not so general. In this paper we introduce an equivalence relation for processes. This equivalence is based exclusively on communication relations and on the notion of process interface. It is called safe implementation equivalence. It relates two processes if they both accept the same language and are equally deterministic. Actually this relation is generated by various preorders relying on relations which allow to evaluate formally the nondeterminism of processes. We apply it to various process languages. And, in each case, we show it to be a congruence, which we algebraically axiomatize.


process behaviour nondeterminism divergence equivalence and congruence relations for processes process interface order relations for process action set 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. AUS84.
    AUSTRY D., BOUDOL G. — Algèbre de processus et synchronisation TCS 30,1 —1984 —Google Scholar
  2. ARN82.
    ARNOLD A., NIVAT M. — Comportement de processus Colloque AFCET: les mathematiques de l'informatique — 1982 —Google Scholar
  3. BER84.
    BERGSTRA J.A, KLOP J.W. —Algebra of communicating processes Report CS-R8421 Centrum voor Wiskunde en informatica —1984—Google Scholar
  4. BRO83.
    BROOKES S. D. — A model for communicating sequential processes Phd thesis Oxford' University —1983 —Google Scholar
  5. DAR82.
    DARONDEAU Ph. — An enlarged definition and complete axiomatization of observational congruence of finite processes LNCS 137 —1982—Google Scholar
  6. DAR83.
    DARONDEAU Ph., KOTT L. — On the observational semantics of fair asynchrony Proc ICALP 83, LNCS 154 —1983 —Google Scholar
  7. GAM84.
    GAMATIE B. —Systèmes de processus communicants et interprétation parallèle de languages fonctionnels IR no 320 INRIA —1984—Google Scholar
  8. GAM85.
    GAMATIE B. — Towards specification and proof af asynchronous systems IR no 466 INRIA —1985— & STACS 86: LNCS 210Google Scholar
  9. GAM86.
    GAMATIE B. — Safe implementation equivalence for asynchronous nondeterministic processes. IR. IRISA —1986—Google Scholar
  10. HOA78.
    HOARE C.A.R. —Communicating sequential processes CACM 21, vol 8—1978—Google Scholar
  11. HOA81.
    HOARE C.A.R., BROOKES S.D., ROSCOE A.W. — A theory of communicating processes — PRG-16 Oxford University —1981—Google Scholar
  12. HEN85.
    HENNESSY M., MILNER R. — Algebraic laws for nondeterminism and concurrency — JACM 32,1 —1985—Google Scholar
  13. HEN83.
    HENNESSY M., DE NICOLA R. — Testing equivalence for processes Proc ICALP 83, LNCS 154 —1983—Google Scholar
  14. MIL80.
    MILNER R. — A calculus of communicating systems LNCS 92 —1980—Google Scholar
  15. PLO81.
    PLOTKIN G. — A structural approach to operational semantics DAIMI FN —19 Comp. Sc. Dept. Aarhus University —1981—Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Gamatie
    • 1
  1. 1.Irisa/Inria Campus de beaulieuRennes Cedex (FCE)

Personalised recommendations