A broadcast-based calculus for communicating systems

Ene, Cristian; Muntean, Traian

doi:10.1109/ipdps.2001.925136

Cited by 45 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To show the correctness of this encoding, we choose bπ-calculus [8] as a representative for channel-based process calculi. The bπ-calculus is a good choice because it uses broadcast instead of binary communication as a basic primitive for interaction which makes it a sort of variant of value-passing CBS [25].…”

Section: Encoding Channel-based Interactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, if Component 7 joined group "a" before "msg" is emitted then both of Component 2 and Component 7 will receive the message. It is worth mentioning that a possible encoding of group communication into bπ-calculus has been introduced in [8]. The encoding is relatively complicated and does not guarantee the causal order of message reception.…”

Section: Encoding Interaction Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the Power of Attribute-Based Communication

Alrahman

Nicola

Loreti

2016

Formal Techniques for Distributed Objects, Components, and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In open systems, i.e. systems operating in an environment that they cannot control and with components that may join or leave, behaviors can arise as side effects of intensive components interaction. Finding ways to understand and design these systems and, most of all, to model the interactions of their components, is a difficult but important endeavor. To tackle these issues, we present AbC , a calculus for attributebased communication. An AbC system consists of a set of parallel agents each of which is equipped with a set of attributes. Communication takes place in an implicit multicast fashion, and interactions among agents are dynamically established by taking into account "connections" as determined by predicates over the attributes of agents. First, the syntax and the semantics of the calculus are presented, then expressiveness and effectiveness of AbC are demonstrated both in terms of modeling scenarios featuring collaboration, reconfiguration, and adaptation and of the possibility of encoding channel-based interactions and other interaction patterns. Behavioral equivalences for AbC are introduced for establishing formal relationships between different descriptions of the same system.

show abstract

Section: Encoding Channel-based Interactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Encoding Interaction Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Power of Attribute-Based Communication

Alrahman

Nicola

Loreti

2016

Formal Techniques for Distributed Objects, Components, and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A further development is the bπ-calculus by [3] where broadcasting is the basic communication primitive. Kramer and Magee [6] give an announcer-listener model in FSP-a variant of CCS.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New CSP Operator for Optional Parallelism

Roggenbach

Grüner

Kourie

et al. 2008

2008 International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We introduce a new CSP operator for modeling scenarios characterised by partial or optional parallelism. We provide examples of such scenarios and sketch the semantics of our operator. Relevant properties are proven. MotivationCSP was introduced more than 20 years ago [4,1,5] and remains a popular means of specifying communicating sequential processes. A fundamental assumption is that, under parallelism, all processes engaging in an event have to do so jointly [10,9]. In particular, the generalized parallel operator in indexed form, X n i=1 L i , requires that if one of the processes L i , i = 1 . . . n, is ready to engage in an event in X, then it cannot proceed until all the other processes are ready to engage in that same event.However, circumstances often arise where this requirement constrains the expressive capacity of CSP from a practical modeling perspective. For example, suppose that the L i processes above represent "listener" or "reader" processes, using a channel c to acquire information in the alphabet X ⊆ α(c) from some other "announcer" process, A.In practice, at any given moment a subset of listener processes may not be ready to act, when the rest are. Moreover, the context often requires that processing progresses, rather than waits for all processes to reach a ready state. Wireless sensor networks [2] are but one of many possible contexts. Here, the announcer could be a sensor node wanting to pass on information to all live surrounding nodes, bypassing those which might have become inactive because their power has run out.The CSP specification A X ( X n i=1 L i ) does not adequately model this scenario. It insists that all processes have to engage jointly in events in X. In this example, all the listener processes will have to be in the form c?x → L i , and the announcing process will have to be in the form c!x → A before any interaction can occur. This obligation to act jointly (e.g. listen or read) characterises all existing CSP parallel operators, whether synchronized, alphabetized or general.In some contexts, using the interleaving operator may ameliorate the problem sketched above. For example,L i ) means that when any L i is in the form c?x → L i and A is in the form c!x → L , then an interaction can take place. At best, then, such interleaving leads to an approximate specification, since only one of possibly several ready L i processes is non-deterministically chosen for interaction with A. (Note, however, that this form could express a supervisor-worker pattern: supervisor A successively communicates a sequence of independent subtasks to any available worker L i .)An alternative operator for modelling scenarios similar to the announcer-listener pattern or the reader part of the reader-writer pattern would evidently be of pragmatic value. It will be seen that if our new operator conjoins one or more processes (e.g. listeners or readers), then any one or more of these processes may synchronize with their environment. Since, synchronization is neither mandatory over all conjoined p...

show abstract

“…If any actor within the session layer exits unexpectedly, a "watchdog" supervisory actor notices via routing events and disconnects the session. Nesting of layers separates groups of related actors by 7 All code is available via http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/tonyg/esop2014/. Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Network as a Language Construct

Garnock-Jones

Tobin-Hochstadt

Felleisen

2014

Programming Languages and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The actor model inspires several important programming languages. In this model, communicating concurrent actors collaborate to produce a result. A pure actor language tends to turn systems into an organization-free collection of processes, however, even though most applications call for layered and tiered architectures. To address this lack of an organizational principle, programmers invent design patterns.This paper investigates integrating some of these basic patterns via a programming language construct. Specifically, it extends a calculus of communicating actors with a "network" construct so that actors can conduct scoped, tiered conversations. The paper then sketches how to articulate design ideas in the calculus, how to implement it, and how such an implementation shapes application programming. Organizing Squabbling ActorsHewitt's actor model [16] presents computation as a collaboration of concurrent and possibly parallel agents. Collaboration necessitates communication, and all communication among actors happens by message passing. The resulting separation of actors isolates resources and thus prevents conflicting use due to competing activities. Several programming languages and frameworks use the actor model as a design guideline, most prominently Erlang [8] and Scala [14].Like the λ-calculus, the actor model is an elegant foundation for language design but fails to scale to real systems. Hence, a pure actor language turns programs and systems into organization-free "soups of processes." More precisely, the model provides no organizational principle that helps programmers arrange collections of actors into a layered or tiered architecture; also out of scope is the management and monitoring of actors via actors. Similarly, the model does not support common idioms of communication, such as multi-cast messaging, sessions, or connections. Finally, it ignores exceptions and errors, meaning it does not deal with partial failures.Implementations of the actor model meet programmer demand for organizational principles with libraries whose APIs and protocols realize appropriate design patterns. Many such APIs hide a mini language that deserves the same kind of focused study that proper linguistic features earn. In this paper, we explain the network as such a hidden language feature. Our central innovation is the Network Calculus, which explains how to equip a given programming language with networks. Our prototype implementation of the calculus, Marketplace, illustrates the potential of the network as a language construct.

show abstract

A broadcast-based calculus for communicating systems

Cited by 45 publications

References 11 publications

On the Power of Attribute-Based Communication

On the Power of Attribute-Based Communication

A New CSP Operator for Optional Parallelism

The Network as a Language Construct

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About