Advertisement

Ideal specification formalism = expressivity + compositionality + decidability + testability + ...

  • Kim Guldstrand Larsen
Invited Lectures
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 458)

Abstract

For the comparison of specification formalisms several criteria may be applied. In this paper we concentrate on the formalization of expressivity and compositionality. We apply these criteria to a number of specification formalisms ranging from behavioural formalisms (based on labelled transition systems) to logical formalisms (based on Hennessy-Milner logic). A main result of the paper is that a specification formalism must be at least as expressive as Hennessy-Milner Logic in order for specifications to be decomposable. Another main result is that implicit behavioural specifications are at least as expressive as logical specifications and do allow specifications to be decomposed. We also present specification formalisms for probabilistic processes, and evaluate these with respect to compositionality.

Keywords

Specification Formalism Transition System Inference Rule Modal Specification Operational Semantic 
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. [BK85]
    J.A. Bergstra and J.W. Klop. Algebra of communicating processes with abstraction. Theoretical Computer Science, 37:77–121, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. [BL90]
    Gérard Boudol and Kim G. Larsen. Graphical versus logical specifications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 431, 1990. In Proceedings of CAAP90.Google Scholar
  3. [Blo88]
    Meyer Bloom, Istrail. bisimulation can't be traced. Proceedings of Principles of Programming Languages, 1988.Google Scholar
  4. [Bou85]
    G. Boudol. Calcul de processus et verification. Technical Report 424, INRIA, 1985.Google Scholar
  5. [Chr90]
    Ivan Christoff. Testing equivalences and fully abstract models for probabilistic processes. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1990. In Proceedings of CONCUR'90.Google Scholar
  6. [dS85]
    R. de Simone. Higher-level synchronising devices in MEIJE-CCS. Theoretical Computer Science, 37, 1985.Google Scholar
  7. [GJS90]
    A. Giacalone, C.C. Jou, and S.A. Smolka. Algebraic reasoning for probabilistic concurrent systems. 1990. In Proceedings of Working Conference on Programming Concepts and Methods, Sea of Gallilee, Israel, April 1990, IFIP TC 2.Google Scholar
  8. [GV89]
    J.F. Groote and F. Vaandrager. Structured operational semantics and bisimulation as a congruence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 372, 1989. In Proceedings of ICALP'89.Google Scholar
  9. [HL89]
    Hans Hüttel and Kim G. Larsen. The use of static constructs in a modal process logic. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 363, 1989.Google Scholar
  10. [HM85]
    M. Hennessy and R. Milner. Algebraic laws for nondeterminism and concurrency. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, pages 137–161, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. [Hoa78]
    C.A.R. Hoare. Communicating sequential processes. Communications of the ACM, 21(8), 1978.Google Scholar
  12. [Hoa85]
    C.A.R. Hoare. Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice-Hall, 1985.Google Scholar
  13. [JS90]
    C.C. Jou and S.A. Smolka. Equivalences, congruences, and complete axiomatizations for probabilistic processes. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1990. In Proceedings of CONCUR'90.Google Scholar
  14. [Lar86]
    K.G. Larsen. Context-Dependent Bisimulation Between Processes. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1986.Google Scholar
  15. [Lar87]
    K.G. Larsen. A context dependent bisimulation between processes. Theoretical Computer Science, 49, 1987.Google Scholar
  16. [Lar89]
    Kim G. Larsen. Compositional theories based on an operational semantics of contexts. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 430, 1989. In proceedings of REX workshop on Stepwise Refinement of Distributed Systems.Google Scholar
  17. [Lar90]
    K.G. Larsen. Modal specifications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 407, 1990.Google Scholar
  18. [LM87]
    K.G. Larsen and R. Milner. Verifying a protocol using relativized bisimulation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 267, 1987. In Proceedings of ICALP'87.Google Scholar
  19. [LS89]
    K.G. Larsen and A. Skou. Bisimulation through probabilistic testing. Proceedings of Principles of Programming Languages, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. [LT88]
    Kim G. Larsen and Bent Thomsen. A modal process logic. In Proceedings on Logic in Computer Science, 1988.Google Scholar
  21. [LX90a]
    K.G. Larsen and L. Xinxin. Compositionality through an operational semantics of contexts. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1990. To appear in Proceedings of ICALP90.Google Scholar
  22. [LX90b]
    K.G. Larsen and L. Xinxin. Equation solving using modal transition systems. In Proceedings on Logic in Computer Science, 1990.Google Scholar
  23. [Mil80]
    R. Milner. Calculus of Communicating Systems, volume 92 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Verlag, 1980.Google Scholar
  24. [Mil83]
    R. Milner. Calculi for synchrony and asynchrony. Theoretical Computer Science, 25, 1983.Google Scholar
  25. [Mil89]
    R. Milner. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, 1989.Google Scholar
  26. [Par81]
    D. Park. Concurrency and automata on infinite sequences. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 104, 1981. in Proc. of 5th GI Conf.Google Scholar
  27. [Plo81]
    G. Plotkin. A structural approach to operational semantics. FN 19, DAIMI, Aarhus University, Denmark, 1981.Google Scholar
  28. [Pnu85]
    A. Pnueli. Linear and branching structures in the semantics and logics of reactive systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 194, 1985. in Proc. of ICALP'87.Google Scholar
  29. [RvGT90]
    S.A. Smolka R. van Glabbeek, B. Steffen and C.M.N. Tofts. Reactive, generative, and stratified models of probabilistic processes. Logic in Computer Science, 1990.Google Scholar
  30. [Sko89]
    Arne Skou. Validation of Concurrent Processes, with emphasis on testing. PhD thesis, Aalbog University Center, Denmark, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kim Guldstrand Larsen
    • 1
  1. 1.SICSKistaSweden

Personalised recommendations