Self-adaptive multiparty sessions

Coppo, Mario; Dezani‐Ciancaglini, Mariangiola; Venneri, Betti

doi:10.1007/s11761-014-0171-9

Cited by 17 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, our model builds upon a style of process semantics in which monitors (which include session types) enable and guide process behavior, formally expressed via reduction steps. To our knowledge, the first formulation of this kind was introduced by Kouzapas [16]; it has been later used for different purposes/motivations, including eventful sessions [17], asynchronous session semantics [18], and adaptation [19,20]. To our knowledge this is the first time that this formulation is used to support reversibility.…”

Section: Models Of Behavioral Types and Contractsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our approach builds upon a style of process semantics in which run-time monitors include session types and enable process reductions. Even if this style of process semantics is not new-it was introduced in [16] and later used in [17,18,19,20]-to our knowledge this is the first time that this formulation is used to support a reversible semantics that is causally consistent.…”

Section: Concluding Remarks and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our main discovery is that external mechanisms typically used to support asynchronous (queue-based) and monitored semantics in session-based concurrency (cf. [16,17,18,19,20]) can also effectively support the definition of reversible sessions. In such semantics, monitors are run-time devices that register the current state of the session protocols implemented in and executed by a process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reversibility in session-based concurrency: A fresh look

Mezzina

Pérez

2017

Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much research has studied foundations for correct and reliable communication-centric software systems. A salient approach to correctness uses verification based on session types to enforce structured communications; a recent approach to reliability uses reversible actions as a way of reacting to unanticipated events or failures. In this paper, we develop a simple observation: the semantic machinery required to define asynchronous (queue-based), monitored communications can also support reversible protocols. We propose a framework of session communication in which monitors support reversibility of (untyped) processes. Main novelty in our approach are session types with present and past, which allow us to streamline the semantics of reversible actions. We prove that reversibility in our framework is causally consistent, and define ways of using monitors to control reversible actions.

show abstract

Section: Models Of Behavioral Types and Contractsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Concluding Remarks and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reversibility in session-based concurrency: A fresh look

Mezzina

Pérez

2017

Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main purpose of this paper is the study of an adaptation mechanism which turns out to be safe, as well as flexible and minimalist, in order to guarantee that communications will continue to evolve in a correct way in case of critical changes in the dynamic environment. The use of asynchronous communications, as in [4], would only add technical complications to deal with reconfiguration of channel queues during adaptation, without providing any significant insight to our issue. This paper is an improved and extended version of [5]; namely, the formal part is completely revised and simplified, more examples are presented and proofs of properties are added.…”

Section: µX!sf(item Amount)?fs(date)x | µX?rs(item Amount)!sr(mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this paper labels are used both for identifying the branches in presence of multiple choices and to connect monitors and processes as in [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Data-driven adaptation for smart sessions

Bono

Coppo

Dezani‐Ciancaglini

et al. 2017

Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a formal framework of self-adaptation for multiparty sessions. The adaptation function contains the dynamic evolution policy, by prescribing how the session needs to reconfigure itself, based on critical changes in global data. A global type prescribes the overall communication choreography; its projections onto participants generate the monitors, which set-up the communication protocols. The key technical novelty of the calculus is the parallel operator for building global types and monitors, which allows the adaptation procedure to be rather flexible. The smart session is able to minimise its adaptation, by partially reconfiguring some of the communications and leaving all others unchanged, in case a part of the whole behaviour only needs to be modified. Furthermore, new participants can be added and/or some of the old participants can be removed. As a main result, we prove that this adaptation mechanism is safe, in order to guarantee that the communications will continue to evolve in a correct way after reconfiguration.

show abstract

Guess Who’s Coming: Runtime Inclusion of Participants in Choreographies

Gabbrielli

Giallorenzo

Lanese

et al. 2019

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Choreographic Programming, a choreography species in a single artefact the expected behaviour of all the participants in a distributed system. The choreography is used to synthesise correct-byconstruction programs for each participant.In previous work, we dened Dynamic Choreographies to support the update of distributed systems at runtime.In this work, we extend Dynamic Choreographies to include new participants at runtime, capturing those use cases where the system might be updated to interact with new, unforeseen stakeholders. We formalise our extension, prove its correctness, and present an implementation in the AIOCJ choreographic framework. Keywords: Choreographic programming • Adaptation of distributed systems • Dynamic inclusion of new software components. 1 To go or not to go . . . almost an introduction Would you go to Padova? Bob asked while typing on his old computer. Well, it depends answered Alice, without stopping to stare at the paper on her desk. She was puzzled by the proof she was reading. The more she was going deep into it, the less she was convinced about its correctness. Depends on what? Oh, on many factors: time and eort required, money, you know, the usual things . . . I don't understand how it's been possible to publish this proof. It's completely hand-waved! And you know what the author told me when I met him at a conference in Jerusalem? He said that the proof was not accurate because . . . we're not mathematicians but computer scientists! Can you believe that? Computer scientists . . . then, my dear hand-waver, what is computer science? A branch of astrology or, perhaps, by any chance, something that happens to use also math? Alice was getting visibly nervous about that paper and its author. The questions from Bob did not help in relaxing her. Research partially supported by the EU H2020 RISE programme under the Marie Skªodowska-Curie grant agreement No 778233. Hum, let's try this package mumbled Bob after a short silence this should x these nasty Latex problems . . . I believe everything in Padova is pretty standard. Nothing sensationally dierent from other places. So all in all those factors you mentioned do not help in the decision. Then, perhaps, it could be worth considering if you really want to go there. I mean, of course it could be nice, but is it really necessary? commented Alice. Indeed, that is the right question. Is it necessary, or perhaps could one avoid it? Perhaps one could do something else or go to some other place. All in all, there are many places in Italy . . . it's a really dicult choice. The conversation continued for a while, with Alice and Bob working at their own desks. Then, the door of the oce slammed open. Guess who's coming! shouted Charlie entering the room How are things going? How many papers have you written in the last week? Charlie was the kind of oce-mate who continuously asks questions. Always anxious about his performance, compared to the ones of his colleagues. He was a nice guy, and often his questions raised interesting problems. However, w...

show abstract

Self-adaptive multiparty sessions

Cited by 17 publications

References 38 publications

Reversibility in session-based concurrency: A fresh look

Reversibility in session-based concurrency: A fresh look

Data-driven adaptation for smart sessions

Guess Who’s Coming: Runtime Inclusion of Participants in Choreographies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About