Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems

The cooperation test [Apt, Francez & de Roever] was originally conceived to capture the proof theoretical analogue of distributed message exchange between disjoint processes, as opposed to the interference freedom test [Owicki & Gries], being the proof theoretical analogue of concurrent comm...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Other Authors: Apt, Krzysztof R. (Editor)
Format: eBook
Language:English
Published: Berlin, Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 1985, 1985
Edition:1st ed. 1985
Series:NATO ASI Subseries F:, Computer and Systems Sciences
Subjects:
Online Access:
Collection: Springer Book Archives -2004 - Collection details see MPG.ReNa
LEADER 03818nmm a2200301 u 4500
001 EB000676084
003 EBX01000000000000000529166
005 00000000000000.0
007 cr|||||||||||||||||||||
008 140122 ||| eng
020 |a 9783642824531 
100 1 |a Apt, Krzysztof R.  |e [editor] 
245 0 0 |a Logics and Models of Concurrent Systems  |h Elektronische Ressource  |c edited by Krzysztof R. Apt 
250 |a 1st ed. 1985 
260 |a Berlin, Heidelberg  |b Springer Berlin Heidelberg  |c 1985, 1985 
300 |a VIII, 500 p  |b online resource 
505 0 |a Temporal logic -- Using temporal logic for automatic verification of finite state systems -- Resolution modal logics -- Tools for verifying network protocols -- An axiomatic semantics of concurrent programming languages -- In transition from global to modular temporal reasoning about programs -- Syntax directed verification methods -- Correctness proofs of distributed termination algorithms -- Script: A communication abstraction mechanism and its verification -- The cooperation test: a syntax-directed verification method -- Around CCS, Theoretical CSP and distributed systems -- Notes on algebraic calculi of processes -- Deadlock analysis in networks of Communicating Processes -- A paradigm for detecting quiescent properties in distributed computations -- About fair asynchrony -- A logic for the specification and proof of controllable processes of CCS -- Specification-oriented programming in TCSP -- Miscellaneous -- Theoretical foundations for non-monotonic reasoning in expert systems -- Towards a theory of knowledge and ignorance: preliminary report -- On the development of reactive systems 
653 |a Computer Communication Networks 
653 |a Programming Techniques 
653 |a Computer programming 
653 |a Computer networks  
041 0 7 |a eng  |2 ISO 639-2 
989 |b SBA  |a Springer Book Archives -2004 
490 0 |a NATO ASI Subseries F:, Computer and Systems Sciences 
028 5 0 |a 10.1007/978-3-642-82453-1 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-82453-1?nosfx=y  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
082 0 |a 004.6 
520 |a The cooperation test [Apt, Francez & de Roever] was originally conceived to capture the proof theoretical analogue of distributed message exchange between disjoint processes, as opposed to the interference freedom test [Owicki & Gries], being the proof theoretical analogue of concurrent communication by means of interference through jointly shared variables. Some authors ([Levin & Gries, Lamport & Schneider, Schlichting and Schneider]) stress that both forms of communication can be proof theoretically characterized using interference freedom only, since proofs for both ultimately amount to an invariance proof of a big global assertion [Ashcroft], invariance of whose parts amounts to interference freedom. Yet I feel that the characteristic nature of the cooperation test is still preserved in the analysis of these authors, because in their analysis of CSP the part dealing with interference freedom specializes to maintenance of a global invariant, the expression of which requires per process the introduction of auxiliary variables which are updated in that process only, thus preserving the concept of disjointness (as opposed to sharing), since now all variables from different processes are disjoint. The cooperation test has been applied to characterize concurrent communication as occurring in Hoare's Communicating Sequential Processes (CSP) [Hoare 2], Ichbiah's ADA [ARM], and Brinch Hansen's Distributed Processes (DP) [Brinch Hansen]. This characterization has been certified through soundness and completeness proofs [Apt 2, Gerth]. As in the interference freedom test this characterization consists of two stages, a local sequential stage and a global stage