Reasoning about Dynamic Features in Specification Languages

Groenboom, Rix; Lavalette, Gerard R. Renardel de

doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-3229-5_19

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For state-based systems we can find a number of approaches trying to formalise the notion of state, e.g. MLCM models [6], d-oids [2,3], Kripke-structures [11], and evolving algebras [7]. The first three approaches are intended to give semantics for specification logics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(State; v) is a cpo. Based on these properties the consistent definition of v for terms of sort state can be proved by structural induction on the terms 6 .…”

Section: Recursion and -Calculusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…)ji 1g. 6 We will only sketch proofs here, for full proofs see [17]). This is proved based on Theorem 3.1 and Kleene's fixpoint Theorem (see e.g.…”

Section: Fixpoint Semanticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Model for Dynamic State-based Systems

Pahl

1996

Electronic Workshops in Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objects can be the structuring mechanism, i.e. the main building blocks of a system. In this paper a computation model formalising the notion of an object is presented which can be used for defining state-based systems. It can be used for both describing semantics of programming languages and defining semantics for a specification logic. A general, formalised and extendible notion of a model for state-based systems is the basic prerequisite for any attempt towards formal language engineering, i.e. for defining and integrating languages in a formal way. Functional aspects are integrated in the presented model. It will be shown that a transition system emerges from the given definition of an object as an entity with state, which may be modified by procedures. Therefore, concurrency can also be dealt with in this approach.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(State; v) is a cpo. Based on these properties the consistent definition of v for terms of sort state can be proved by structural induction on the terms 6 .…”

Section: Recursion and -Calculusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Model for Dynamic State-based Systems

Pahl

1996

Electronic Workshops in Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, whereas in DL, transitions can only be defined in terms of assignments to variables, PDDL and DDL define transitions in terms of truth-assignments to propositions (PDDL) or predicates (DDL). In this respect, DDL and PDDL are closely related to the more recent proposals for the language MLPM [8], which allows the explicit definition of transitions by assigning values to truth of predicates, and of MLCM [47], which also allows for the assignment of function values. We now turn to the discussion of PDDL and DDL, respectively.…”

Section: Dynamic Database Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey of languages for specifying dynamics: a knowledge engineering perspective

Eck

Engelfriet

Fensel

et al. 2001

IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractÐDuring the last years, a number of formal specification languages for knowledge-based systems has been developed. Characteristics for knowledge-based systems are a complex knowledge base and an inference engine which uses this knowledge to solve a given problem. Specification languages for knowledge-based systems have to cover both aspects. They have to provide the means to specify a complex and large amount of knowledge and they have to provide the means to specify the dynamic reasoning behavior of a knowledge-based system. This paper focuses on the second aspect. For this purpose, we survey existing approaches for specifying dynamic behavior in related areas of research. In fact, we have taken approaches for the specification of information systems (Language for Conceptual Modeling and TROLL), approaches for the specification of database updates and logic programming (Transaction Logic and Dynamic Database Logic) and the generic specification framework of Abstract State Machines.

show abstract

“…A formal definition of syntax and semantics and a partial axiomatization of ealgebras based on the Modal Logic of Creation and Modification (MLCM) are described by Groenboom & Renardel de Lavalette (1995). MLCM (Groenboom & Renardel de Lavalette, 1994) has been developed to provide a partial formalisation and axiomatization of the dynamic part of the Common Object-oriented Language for Design, COLD (Feijs et al, 1989;Feijs & Jonkers, 1992) 22 . States are described by an algebra containing sorts, predicates and functions.…”

Section: Operationalization and Formalization Of Ealgebrasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formal specification languages in knowledge and software engineering

Fensel¹

1995

The Knowledge Engineering Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Doberkat, E.-E. and Fox, D. (1989) but also heuristic knowledge to achieve the functionality in an efficient manner. Often, this heuristic knowledge exists only implicitly as human expertise. Large parts of this expertise are based on tacit knowledge (Berry, 1987). Knowledge acquisition is a modelling activity which tries to come up with an explicit model of this knowledge. There is a high need for tools which support this modelling process by evaluating these models. Prototyping is a very useful tool for this purpose. The development of formally correct specifications and implementations is of less concern during this activity. An exception is the work of Aben (1995) who provides a formal calculus based on a pre-and post-condition notions for inference actions.:A further difference, which probably stems from the same reason, is that knowledge specification languages make much more use of semiformal specification techniques than comparable techniques in software engineering. Actually, most of the knowledge specification languages were developed to formally refine semiformal specification techniques like the KADS model of expertise. Therefore, these languages provide strong support during the conceptual modelling process, and formal specifications are structured using different modelling primitives and knowledge types stemming from semiformal techniques. The understandability of formal specifications is improved and the process of writing formal specifications is simplified. On the one hand, the use of semiformal specification techniques can also be found in software engineering, especially by specification languages which are designed for the early phase during software development (called requirements engineering) or as a result of the current trend of object-oriented specification techniques. On the other hand, the use of modelling primitives at a high conceptual level for kbs is not just a question of emphasis but it is enabled by introducing assumptions about the type of system which can be meaningfully specified with such a language. Specification languages for kbs are special-purpose languages which provide support at a higher level by restricting their scope of applicability. 30Finally, a difference between knowledge specification languages and specification languages in Software Engineering lies in the fact that most of the latter aim for a declarative specification of the functionality of a system. They try to abstract from how this functionality is achieved. As already mentioned, in knowledge-based system development part of the "how" is regarded as essential expertise which must be specified. Therefore, an inference layer in (ML) 2 or KARL specifies the significant inferences of a problem-solving process and the task layer supplements these definitions with a control flow which should ensure an effective and efficient computation of a solution. They specify in an abstract manner (i.e., by defining control over functionally specified substeps) how a solution is achieved instead of only describing wh...

show abstract

Reasoning about Dynamic Features in Specification Languages

Cited by 9 publications

References 10 publications

A Model for Dynamic State-based Systems

A Model for Dynamic State-based Systems

A survey of languages for specifying dynamics: a knowledge engineering perspective

Formal specification languages in knowledge and software engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About