Abstract. We present a study of the notion of coalgebraic simulation introduced by Hughes and Jacobs. Although in their original paper they allow any functorial order in their definition of coalgebraic simulation, for the simulation relations to have good properties they focus their attention on functors with orders which are strongly stable. This guarantees a so-called "composition-preserving" property from which all the desired good properties follow. We have noticed that the notion of strong stability not only ensures such good properties but also "distinguishes the direction" of the simulation. For example, the classic notion of simulation for labeled transition systems, the relation "p is simulated by q", can be defined as a coalgebraic simulation relation by means of a strongly stable order, whereas the opposite relation, "p simulates q", cannot. Our study was motivated by some interesting classes of simulations that illustrate the application of these results: covariant-contravariant simulations and conformance simulations.
In addition to pre-and postconditions, program specifications in recent separation logics for concurrency have employed an algebraic structure of resources-a form of state transition systems-to describe the state-based program invariants that must be preserved, and to record the permissible atomic changes to program state. In this paper we introduce a novel notion of resource morphism, i.e. structure-preserving function on resources, and show how to effectively integrate it into separation logic, using an associated notion of morphism-specific simulation. We apply morphisms and simulations to programs verified under one resource, to compositionally adapt them to operate under another resource, thus facilitating proof reuse. lock = do x ← CAS(r , false, true) while ¬x 1 The idea of bounding the interference is the foundation behind the classic rely-guarantee method [Jones 1983] as well. In fact, resources may be seen as structuring and compactly representing-in the form of transitions-the rely and guarantee relations of the rely-guarantee method. 2 The Compare-and-Set variant of CAS(r, a, b) [Herlihy and Shavit 2008] atomically sets the pointer r to b if r contains a, otherwise leaves r unchanged. It moreover returns a Boolean value denoting the success or failure of the operation.
Covariant-contravariant simulation is a combination of standard (covariant) simulation, its contravariant counterpart and bisimulation. We have previously studied its logical characterization by means of the covariant-contravariant modal logic. Moreover, we have investigated the relationships between this model and that of modal transition systems, where two kinds of transitions (the so-called may and must transitions) were combined in order to obtain a simple framework to express a notion of refinement over state-transition models. In a classic paper, Boudol and Larsen established a precise connection between the graphical approach, by means of modal transition systems, and the logical approach, based on Hennessy-Milner logic without negation, to system specification. They obtained a (graphical) representation theorem proving that a formula can be represented by a term if, and only if, it is consistent and prime. We show in this paper that the formulae from the covariantcontravariant modal logic that admit a "graphical" representation by means of processes, modulo the covariant-contravariant simulation preorder, are also the consistent and prime ones. In order to obtain the desired graphical representation result, we first restrict ourselves to the case of covariantcontravariant systems without bivariant actions. Bivariant actions can be incorporated later by means of an encoding that splits each bivariant action into its covariant and its contravariant parts.
Abstract. Covariant-contravariant simulation and conformance simulation are two generalizations of the simple notion of simulation which aim at capturing the fact that it is not always the case that "the larger the number of behaviors, the better". Therefore, they can be considered to be more adequate to express the fact that a system is a correct implementation of some specification. We have previously shown that these two more elaborated notions fit well within the categorical framework developed to study the notion of simulation in a generic way. Now we show that their behaviors have also simple and natural logical characterizations, though more elaborated than those for the plain simulation semantics.
In the setting of the modal logic that characterizes modal refinement over modal transition systems, Boudol and Larsen showed that the formulae for which model checking can be reduced to preorder checking, that is, the characteristic formulae, are exactly the consistent and prime ones. This paper presents general, sufficient conditions guaranteeing that characteristic formulae are exactly the consistent and prime ones. It is shown that the given conditions apply to the logics characterizing all the semantics in van Glabbeek's branching-time spectrum.
This paper studies the relationships between three notions of behavioural preorder that have been proposed in the literature: refinement over modal transition systems, and the covariant-contravariant simulation and the partial bisimulation preorders over labelled transition systems. It is shown that there are mutual translations between modal transition systems and labelled transition systems that preserve, and reflect, refinement and the covariant-contravariant simulation preorder. The translations are also shown to preserve the modal properties that can be expressed in the logics that characterize those preorders. A translation from labelled transition systems modulo the partial bisimulation preorder into the same model modulo the covariant-contravariant simulation preorder is also offered, together with some evidence that the former model is less expressive than the latter. In order to gain more insight into the relationships between modal transition systems modulo refinement and labelled transition systems modulo the covariant-contravariant simulation preorder, their connections are also phrased and studied in the context of institutions.
Covariant-contravariant simulation and conformance simulation generalize plain simulation and try to capture the fact that it is not always the case that "the larger the number of behaviors, the better". We have previously studied their logical characterizations and in this paper we present the axiomatizations of the preorders defined by the new simulation relations and their induced equivalences. The interest of our results lies in the fact that the axiomatizations help us to know the new simulations better, understanding in particular the role of the contravariant characteristics and their interplay with the covariant ones; moreover, the axiomatizations provide us with a powerful tool to (algebraically) prove results of the corresponding semantics. But we also consider our results interesting from a metatheoretical point of view: the fact that the covariant-contravariant simulation equivalence is indeed ground axiomatizable when there is no action that exhibits both a covariant and a contravariant behaviour, but becomes non-axiomatizable whenever we have together actions of that kind and either covariant or contravariant actions, offers us a new subtle example of the narrow border separating axiomatizable and non-axiomatizable semantics. We expect that by studying these examples we will be able to develop a general theory separating axiomatizable and non-axiomatizable semantics
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2023 scite Inc. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.