Integration of Specification Languages Using Viewpoints

Abstract

Abstract. This work provides a general integration mechanism for specification languages motivated by partial specification. We use category theory to formalise specification languages and define a relational semantic framework. We show some inherent limits of the approach, and propose a solution inspired from Z semantics to overcome it. An integration of Z and CCS is considered as an example.

An Interpretation of Concurrent Hybrid Time Systems over Multi-clock Systems

“…A semantics of the concurrent language from Winskel [1995] is defined in this category, and a bisimulation concept is introduced. Moreover, in Bujorianu [2004] we show that the standard operational semantics from Winskel [1995] is sound in this categorical semantics (that means that the two semantics are compatible, with the categorical semantics playing the role of the denotational one). This construction provides a very elegant specification of concurrent real time systems, 17th IFAC World Congress (IFAC'08) Seoul, Korea, July 6-11, 2008 as well a rigorous semantics for sytem verification (in the spirit of ).…”

Viewpoint Development of Stochastic Hybrid Systems

“…Remark 5: [18] Assumptions 1, 2 and 3 together imply the Rogers-Pitman intertwining relation [27], which are (10) and (11), (12), where…”

“…Heterogeneity is treated by translating all viewpoints into the relational framework. In some recent developments, the relational approach has been generalised categorically to a framework called correspondence carrying specifications [11], [12].…”

A Categorical Approach to Structuring and Promoting Z Specifications

“…In contrast, our approach makes use of theories and morphisms between them in formalising Z designs, thus leading to a well structured categorical semantics of designs. In [7], category theory is used in the definition of a relational semantic framework to interpret Z as well as other specification languages. As in our case, the approach allows for heterogeneous specification; however, the work uses Z simply as an example of a language based on the "state & operations" viewpoint, but it does not show how to deal with Z's structuring mechanisms.…”