Factorization of finite state machines under observational equivalence

  • Huajun Qin
  • Philip Lewis
Selected Presentations
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 458)


A usual approach to designing a complex concurrent system is to follow the topdown design methodology: the abstract specification of the system is decomposed into a network of communicating modules such that the behavior of the modules in composition is equivalent to the behavior of the system specification.

The factorization problem is to construct the specification of a submodule X when the specifications of the system and all submodules but X are given. It is usually described by the equaition \(A|X\mathop = \limits^e B\) where A and X are submodules of system B, | is a composition operator, and \(\mathop = \limits^e \) is the equivalence criterion.

In this paper we use a finite state machine (FSM) model consistent with CCS and study the factorization problem \(A|||X \approx B\) where ||| is a derived CCS composition operator and ≈ represents observational equivalence. An algorithm is presented and proved correct to find the most general specification of submodule X for \(A|||X \approx B\) with B deterministic. This paper extends and is based on the work of M.W. Shields.


Composition Operator Finite State Machine State Pair Algorithm Step Equivalence Criterion 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [La87]
    K. G. Larsen, “A Context Dependent Equivalence Between Processes”, Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 49, pp. 185–215, 1987.Google Scholar
  2. [LL89]
    K. G. Larsen, X. Liu, “Equation Solving Using Modal Transition Systems”, In Proceedings of the Fifth Annaul IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pp. 108–117, June 1990.Google Scholar
  3. [MB83]
    P. Merlin, G. Bochmann, “On the Construction of Submodule Specifications and Communication Protocols”, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1–25, 1983.Google Scholar
  4. [Mi80]
    R. Milner, Calculus for Communicating Systems, LNCS 92, Springer Verlag, 1980.Google Scholar
  5. [Mi88]
    R. Milner, “Operational and Algebraic Semantics of Concurrent Processes”, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Univ. of Edinburgh, Technical Report, ECS-LFCS-88-46, Feb. 1988.Google Scholar
  6. [Pa87]
    J. Parrow, “Submodule Construction as Equation Solving in CCS”, Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 68, pp. 175–202, 1989.Google Scholar
  7. [QL90]
    H. Qin, P. Lewis, “Factorization of Finite State Machines under Strong and Observational Equivalences”, (submitted to Journal of Formal Aspects of Computing)Google Scholar
  8. [Ra89]
    L. P. Ranatunga, “Process Synthesis by Solving an Equation in CCS”, (submitted for publication), 1989.Google Scholar
  9. [SA88]
    D.P. Sidhu, J. Aristizabal, “Constructing Submodule Specifications and Network Protocols”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 14, No. 11, pp. 1565–1577, November 1988.Google Scholar
  10. [Sh89]
    M.W. Shields, “Implicit System Specification and the Interface Equation”, The Computer Journal, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 399–412, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huajun Qin
    • 1
  • Philip Lewis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceSUNY at Stony BrookStony BrookUSA

Personalised recommendations