Skip to main content

Comparing the Expressive Power of Well-Structured Transition Systems

  • Conference paper
Computer Science Logic (CSL 2007)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 4646))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We compare the expressive power of a class of well-structured transition systems that includes relational automata, Petri nets, lossy channel systems, and constrained multiset rewriting systems. For each one of these models we study the class of languages generated by labelled transition systems describing their semantics. We consider here two types of accepting conditions: coverability and reachability of a given configuration. In both cases we obtain a strict hierarchy in which constrained multiset rewriting systems is the the most expressive model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abdulla, P.A., Čerāns, K., Jonsson, B., Yih-Kuen, T.: General decidability theorems for infinite-state systems. In: LICS, pp. 313–321 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Abdulla, P.A., Delzanno, G.: On the coverability problem for constrained multiset rewriting. In: AVIS 2006, an ETAPS Workshop (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Abdulla, P.A., Delzanno, G., Van Begin, L.: Comparing the expressive power of well-structured transition systems. Technical Report, DISI (June 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Abdulla, P.A., Jonsson, B.: Model checking of systems with many identical timed processes. TCS 290(1), 241–264 (2003)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Abdulla, P.A., Jonsson, B.: Verifying programs with unreliable channels. Inf. Comput. 127(2), 91–101 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Abdulla, P.A., Jonsson, B.: Undecidable verification problems for programs with unreliable channels. Inf. Comput. 130(1), 71–90 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Bertrand, N., Schnoebelen, Ph.: A short visit to the STS hierarchy. ENTCS 154(3), 59–69 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cécé, G., Finkel, A., Iyer, S.P.: Unreliable channels are easier to verify than perfect channels. Inf. Comput. 124(1), 20–31 (1996)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Čerāns, K.: Deciding properties of integral relational automata. In: Shamir, E., Abiteboul, S. (eds.) ICALP 1994. LNCS, vol. 820, pp. 35–46. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dufourd, C., Finkel, A., Schnoebelen, P.: Reset nets between decidability and undecidability. In: Larsen, K.G., Skyum, S., Winskel, G. (eds.) ICALP 1998. LNCS, vol. 1443, pp. 103–115. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Esparza, J., Finkel, A., Mayr, R.: On the verification of broadcast protocols. In: LICS 1999, pp. 352–359 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Finkel, A., Geeraerts, G., Raskin, J.-F., Van Begin, L.: On the ω-language expressive power of extended petri nets. TCS 356(3), 374–386 (2006)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Finkel, A., Schnoebelen, Ph.: Well-structured transition systems everywhere! TCS 256(1-2), 63–92 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Geeraerts, G., Raskin, J.-F., Van Begin, L.: Well-structured languages. Technical report 542, ULB (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hack, M.: Petri net languages. Technical report 159, MIT, Cambridge (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Henzinger, T.A., Majumdar, R., Raskin, J.-F.: A classification of symbolic transition systems. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 6(1), 1–32 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Lazic̀, R., Newcomb, T., Ouaknine, J., Roscoe, A.W., Worell, J.: Nets with tokens which carry data. In: ATPN 2007 (to appear, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mayr, R.: Undecidable problems in unreliable computations. In: Gonnet, G.H., Viola, A. (eds.) LATIN 2000. LNCS, vol. 1776, pp. 377–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Petri, C.A.: Kommunikation mit Automaten. PhD Thesis. Univ. of Bonn (1962)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Jacques Duparc Thomas A. Henzinger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Abdulla, P.A., Delzanno, G., Van Begin, L. (2007). Comparing the Expressive Power of Well-Structured Transition Systems. In: Duparc, J., Henzinger, T.A. (eds) Computer Science Logic. CSL 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4646. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74915-8_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74915-8_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-74914-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-74915-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics