Impossible futures and determinism

Voorhoeve, Marc; Mauw, Sjouke

doi:10.1016/s0020-0190(01)00217-4

Cited by 28 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this paper, we study impossible futures semantics [11,12]. This semantics is missing in van Glabbeek's original spectrum, because it was only studied seriously from 2001 on, the year that [6] appeared.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No, as for impossible futures semantics, the (in)equational theory remained unexplored. Only the inequational theory of BCCSP modulo weak impossible futures preorder was studied in [12]. In that paper, Voorhoeve and Mauw offer a finite, sound, ground-complete axiomatization; their ground-completeness proof relies heavily on the presence of τ .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In that paper, Voorhoeve and Mauw offer a finite, sound, ground-complete axiomatization; their ground-completeness proof relies heavily on the presence of τ . They also prove that their axiomatization is ω-complete (they do not refer to ω-completeness explicitly, but they work on open terms, see [12,Thm. 5]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

On the Axiomatizability of Impossible Futures: Preorder versus Equivalence

Chen

Fokkink

2008

2008 23rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

C e n t r u m v o o r W i s k u n d e e n I n f o r m a t i c a Software ENgineeringOn the axiomatizability of impossible futures: preorder versus equivalence T. Chen, W.J. Fokkink REPORT SEN-R0801 MARCH 2008Software Engineering On the axiomatizability of impossible futures: preorder versus equivalence ABSTRACT We investigate the (in)equational theory of impossible futures semantics over the process algebra BCCSP. We prove that no finite, sound axiomatization for BCCSP modulo impossible futures equivalence is ground-complete. By contrast, we present a finite, sound, groundcomplete axiomatization for BCCSP modulo impossible futures preorder}. If the alphabet of actions is infinite, then this axiomatization is shown to be omega-complete. If the alphabet is finite, we prove that the inequational theory of BCCSP modulo impossible futures preorder lacks such a finite basis. We also derive non-finite axiomatizability results for nested impossible futures semantics. ABSTRACTWe investigate the (in)equational theory of impossible futures semantics over the process algebra BCCSP.We prove that no finite, sound axiomatization for BCCSP modulo impossible futures equivalence is groundcomplete. By contrast, we present a finite, sound, ground-complete axiomatization for BCCSP modulo impossible futures preorder. If the alphabet of actions is infinite, then this axiomatization is shown to be ω-complete. If the alphabet is finite, we prove that the inequational theory of BCCSP modulo impossible futures preorder lacks such a finite basis. We also derive non-finite axiomatizability results for nested impossible futures semantics.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the Axiomatizability of Impossible Futures: Preorder versus Equivalence

Chen

Fokkink

2008

2008 23rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Usually, controller-based preorders like ours are precongruences and, thus, a compositional refinement notion on open systems; as this is not the case for our responsiveness accordance, we characterize the coarsest precongruence that is contained in this preorder. Interestingly, we obtain Vogler's F + -semantics [33] (which has been later introduced as impossible futures [36]), and the corresponding precongruence is the should testing preorder [25,6,29]. Such a characterization is vital, because the definition of a coarsest precongruence considers arbitrary parallel environments and is, therefore, hard to check in concrete cases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trace- and failure-based semantics for responsiveness

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.We study open systems modeled as Petri nets with an interface for asynchronous (i.e., buffered) communication with other open systems. As a minimal requirement for successful communication, we investigate responsiveness, which guarantees that an open system and its environment always have the possibility to communicate. We investigate responsiveness with and without final states and also their respective bounded variants, where the number of pending messages never exceeds a previously known bound. Responsiveness accordance describes when one open system can be safely replaced by another open system. We present a trace-based characterization for each accordance variant. As none of the relations turns out to be compositional (i.e., it is no precongruence), we characterize the coarsest compositional relation (i.e., the coarsest precongruence) that is contained in each relation, using a variation of should testing. For the two unbounded variants, the precongruences are not decidable, but for the two bounded variants we show decidability.

show abstract

“…Table 1 on p. 517 of that article summarizes their findings for each semantics in the spectrum. Notable later results by Chen and Fokkink presented in [8] give the first example of a semanticsthe so-called impossible future semantics from [19]-where the preorder defining the semantics can be finitely axiomatized over BCCSP, but its induced equivalence cannot.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%