2010
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-11623-0_1
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Abstract. Automata theory presents roughly three types of automata: finite automata, pushdown automata and Turing machines. The automata are treated as language acceptors, and the expressiveness of the automata models are considered modulo language equivalence. This notion of equivalence is arguably too coarse to satisfactorily deal with a notion of interaction that is fundamental to contemporary computing. In this paper we therefore reconsider the automaton models from automata theory modulo branching bisimil… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
(11 reference statements)
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…the set of states S p consists of all process expressions reachable from p; 2. the transition relation → p is the restriction to S p of the transition relation → defined on all process expressions by the operational rules in Table 1 3. the process expression p is the initial state, i.e.…”
Section: A Process Calculusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the set of states S p consists of all process expressions reachable from p; 2. the transition relation → p is the restriction to S p of the transition relation → defined on all process expressions by the operational rules in Table 1 3. the process expression p is the initial state, i.e.…”
Section: A Process Calculusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If we use action postfix instead of action prefix, then on the one hand not every finite automaton can be specified, and on the other hand, by means of a simple recursive equation we can specify an infinite transition system (see [4]). We conclude that the classes of processes defined by right-linear and left-linear grammars do not coincide.…”
Section: Regular Expressionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We note that, from a process-theoretic point of view, the ES and FSES approaches lead to the same notion of pushdown process, whereas the FS approach leads to a different notion. We established in [4] that for FS, the connection with context-free grammars is more difficult to make (see further on). That is why we adopt the FSES approach in the sequel.…”
Section: ↑ ∈ S Is the Initial State And 6 ↓ ⊆ S Is The Set Of Finalmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations