Logical Properites of Name Restriction

Cardelli, Luca; Gordon, Andrew D.

doi:10.1007/3-540-45413-6_8

Cited by 50 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As discussed in Section 4.5, Cardelli and Gordon [7] present an extended version of the logic that allows reasoning about restricted names, and another paper [13] shows that the algorithm presented here can be directly extended to deal with name restriction. A subsequent paper [12] shows that model checking a finite-control version of the ambient calculus with restricted names is PSPACEcomplete.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, Cardelli and Gordon [7] have presented an extended version of the logic that allows reasoning about restricted names; intuitively, a process P satisfies the formula n®A (read "reveal n then A") if it is possible to pull a restricted name from P to the top and rename it n and then strip off the restriction to leave a residual process that satisfies A. The inverse of revelation is hiding: a process P satisfies A n (read "hide n then A") if it is possible to hide n in P and then satisfy A.…”

Section: Extension To Name Restrictionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Serendipitously, these spatial modalities can also usefully describe the tree structure of semistructured databases [6]. Other work on the ambient logic includes a study of the process equivalence induced by the satisfaction relation [26] and a study of the logic extended with constructs for describing private names [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Decidability of Model Checking Mobile Ambients

Charatonik

Talbot

2001

Computer Science Logic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We settle the complexity bounds of the model checking problem for the ambient calculus with public names against the ambient logic. We show that if either the calculus contains replication or the logic contains the guarantee operator, the problem is undecidable. In the case of the replication-free calculus and guarantee-free logic we prove that the problem is PSPACE-complete. For the complexity upper-bound, we devise a new representation of processes that remains of polynomial size during process execution; this allows us to keep the model checking procedure in polynomial space. Moreover, we prove PSPACE-hardness of the problem for several quite simple fragments of the calculus and the logic; this suggests that there are no interesting fragments with polynomial-time model checking algorithms.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Extension To Name Restrictionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Decidability of Model Checking Mobile Ambients

Charatonik

Talbot

2001

Computer Science Logic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Related to AUTL, concerning properties of freshness, is the Spatial Logic (SL) [4,3]. SL is defined for the Ambient Calculus and has modalities that refer to space as well as time.…”

Section: Related and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model Checking Birth and Death

Distefano

Rensink

Katoen

2002

Foundations of Information Technology in the Era of Network and Mobile Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes Allocational Temporal Logic (AUTL) as a formalism to express properties concerning the dynamic allocation (birth) and de-allocation (death) of entities, such as the objects in an object-based system. The logic is interpreted on History-Dependent Automata, extended with a symbolic representation for certain cases of unbounded allocation. The paper also presents a simple imperative language with primitive statements for (de)allocation, with an operational semantics, to illustrate the kind of behaviour that can be modelled. The main contribution of the paper is a tableau-based model checking algorithm for AUTL, along the lines of Lichtenstein and Pnueli 's algorithm for LTL.

show abstract

“…Cardelli and Gordon suggest an elegant solution to this problem [12]. They adopt Gabbay and Pitts fresh name quantification, originally used for binder manipulation and Nominal Logics [20,16], and combine it with a new operator, revelation, which allows a public name to be used to denote a protected one.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decidability of Freshness, Undecidability of Revelation

Conforti

Ghelli

2004

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We study decidability of a logic for describing processes with restricted names. We choose a minimal fragment of the Ambient Logic, but the techniques we present should apply to every logic which uses Cardelli and Gordon revelation and hiding operators, and Gabbay and Pitts freshness quantifier. We start from the static fragment of ambient logic that Calcagno, Cardelli and Gordon proved to be decidable. We prove that the addition of a hiding quantifier makes the logic undecidable. Hiding can be decomposed as freshness plus revelation. Quite surprisingly, freshness alone is decidable, but revelation alone is not.

show abstract

Logical Properites of Name Restriction

Cited by 50 publications

References 13 publications

The Decidability of Model Checking Mobile Ambients

The Decidability of Model Checking Mobile Ambients

Model Checking Birth and Death

Decidability of Freshness, Undecidability of Revelation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About