On the Expressiveness of Refinement Settings

Fecher, Harald; Frutos-Escrig, David de; Lüttgen, Gerald; Schmidt, Heiko A.

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11623-0_16

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, the third author recently contributed in [11] to the comparison of several refinement settings, including modal and mixed transition systems. The developments in that paper offer a different approach to the comparison and application of the formalisms studied in this article.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the specification of modal systems: A comparison of three frameworks

Aceto

Fábregas

Frutos-Escrig

et al. 2013

Science of Computer Programming

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies the relationships between three notions of behavioural preorder that have been proposed in the literature: refinement over modal transition systems, and the covariant-contravariant simulation and the partial bisimulation preorders over labelled transition systems. It is shown that there are mutual translations between modal transition systems and labelled transition systems that preserve, and reflect, refinement and the covariant-contravariant simulation preorder. The translations are also shown to preserve the modal properties that can be expressed in the logics that characterize those preorders. A translation from labelled transition systems modulo the partial bisimulation preorder into the same model modulo the covariant-contravariant simulation preorder is also offered, together with some evidence that the former model is less expressive than the latter. In order to gain more insight into the relationships between modal transition systems modulo refinement and labelled transition systems modulo the covariant-contravariant simulation preorder, their connections are also phrased and studied in the context of institutions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the specification of modal systems: A comparison of three frameworks

Aceto

Fábregas

Frutos-Escrig

et al. 2013

Science of Computer Programming

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Future work shall follow both theoretical and practical directions. On the theoretical side, we firstly wish to study MIA's expressiveness in comparison to other theories via thoroughness [FFELS09]. More substantially, however, we intend to enrich MIA with temporal-logic operators, in the spirit of truly mixing operational and temporal-logic styles of specification in the line of our Logic LTS in [LV11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modal Interface Automata

Lüttgen¹,

Vogler²

2013

Logical Methods in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. De Alfaro and Henzinger's Interface Automata (IA) and Nyman et al.'s recent combination IOMTS of IA and Larsen's Modal Transition Systems (MTS) are established frameworks for specifying interfaces of system components. However, neither IA nor IOMTS consider conjunction that is needed in practice when a component shall satisfy multiple interfaces, while Larsen's MTS-conjunction is not closed and Beneš et al.'s conjunction on disjunctive MTS does not treat internal transitions. In addition, IOMTSparallel composition exhibits a compositionality defect.This article defines conjunction (and also disjunction) on IA and disjunctive MTS and proves the operators to be 'correct', i.e., the greatest lower bounds (least upper bounds) wrt. IA-and resp. MTS-refinement. As its main contribution, a novel interface theory called Modal Interface Automata (MIA) is introduced: MIA is a rich subset of IOMTS featuring explicit output-must-transitions while input-transitions are always allowed implicitly, is equipped with compositional parallel, conjunction and disjunction operators, and allows a simpler embedding of IA than Nyman's. Thus, it fixes the shortcomings of related work, without restricting designers to deterministic interfaces as Raclet et al.'s modal interface theory does.

show abstract

“…Regarding future work, we plan to study the algorithmic complexity implied by MIA-refinement [12], and MIA's expressiveness in comparison to other theories via thoroughness [6]. On the practical side, we wish to adapt existing tool support for interface theories, e.g., the MIO Workbench [3], to MIA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modal Interface Automata

Lüttgen

Vogler

2012

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

De Alfaro and Henzinger's Interface Automata (IA) and Nyman et al.'s recent combination IOMTS of IA and Larsen's Modal Transition Systems (MTS) are established frameworks for specifying interfaces of system components. However, neither IA nor IOMTS consider conjunction that is needed in practice when a component satisfies multiple interfaces, while Larsen's MTS-conjunction is not closed. In addition, IOMTS-parallel composition exhibits a compositionality defect. This paper defines conjunction on IA and MTS and proves the operators to be 'correct', i.e., the greatest lower bounds wrt. IA-and resp. MTS-refinement. As its main contribution, a novel interface theory called Modal Interface Automata (MIA) is introduced: MIA is a rich subset of IOMTS, is equipped with compositional parallel and conjunction operators, and allows a simpler embedding of IA than Nyman's. Thus, it fixes the shortcomings of related work, without restricting designers to deterministic interfaces as Raclet et al.'s modal interface theory does.

show abstract

On the Expressiveness of Refinement Settings

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

On the specification of modal systems: A comparison of three frameworks

On the specification of modal systems: A comparison of three frameworks

Modal Interface Automata

Modal Interface Automata

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About