Guest editors’ preface to special issue on interval temporal logics

Moszkowski, Ben; Guelev, Dimitar P.; Leucker, Martin

doi:10.1007/s10472-014-9417-7

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To prepare for applying scoping, we derive Thus itl(F ) is satisfied over an interval provided that the latter can be split into three successive subintervals (the first two being finite and the third one infinite) overlapping on single states so that the variables α and β are kept unchanged, except for one flipping of α within the first interval, and one flipping of β in the second interval (see (4) for the definitions of fs(α | β), fs(β | α), and infstbl(α, β)). Note that finsts(F ) = ∅ and infsts(F…”

Section: Synchronisation and Restrictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Temporal logics [1,2,3,4] and Petri nets [5,6] are generally regarded as fundamentally different approaches to the specification and analysis of concurrent systems. The former allow one to specify both the system designs and correctness requirements within a single logical framework, and the verification of correctness can be done by checking the satisfaction of formulas, or model checking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, interval temporal logics allow one to easily capture concepts relating to action duration or shared-variable concurrency (e.g., [20]). The preface [4] of a journal special issue on interval temporal logics identified, in particular, two categories of temporal logics formalisms for intervals: (i) modal formalisms such as HS-logics [21] and CDT [22] with interval-based variables and capable of expressing Allen's relations [23] (recent developments concerning model checking HS-logics include [24,25,26,27,28]); and (ii) Interval Temporal Logic (ITL) of [29,30,12] together with its variations and adaptations which use state-based variables and the sequential composition 'chop' operator to a significant extent. In this paper we focus on ITL which has influenced several research groups and projects, as well as IEEE standard 1647 ( [31]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, each pre-synchronisation action can be represented by a single variable in the corresponding ITL formula 4. In the sense of generating isomorphic box net with 'isomorphic' step sequences, see Proposition 2.7 5.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

From Box Algebra to Interval Temporal Logic

Klaudel

Koutny

Duan

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we further develop a recently introduced semantic link between temporal logics and Petri nets. We focus on two specific formalisms, Interval Temporal Logic (ITL) and Box Algebra (BA), which are closely related by their compositional approach to constructing system descriptions. The overall goal of our investigation is to translate Petri nets into behaviourally equivalent logical formulas. As a result, the analysis of system properties can be carried out using either of the two formalisms, exploiting their respective strengths and powerful tool support. The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, we extend the existing translation from BA to ITL, by removing restrictions concerning the way control flow of concurrent system is modelled, and by allowing a fully general synchronisation operator. Second, we strengthen the notion of equivalence between a Petri net and the corresponding logical formula by proving such an equivalence at the level of transition-based executions of Petri nets rather than just by looking at their labels. We also show that the complexity of the proposed translation compares favourably with the complexity of the translation from BA expressions to Petri nets.

show abstract

Section: Synchronisation and Restrictionmentioning

confidence: 99%