Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Comparing two fully abstract dataflow models

  • Submitted Presentations
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
PARLE '89 Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe (PARLE 1989)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 366))

Abstract

A dataflow network consists of nodes that communicate by passing data over unbounded FIFO channels. For dataflow networks containing only deterministic nodes, Kahn has presented a simple and elegant semantic model. However, the straight-forward generalization of this model to nondeterministic networks is not compositional. In the literature are two compositional models which in addition are fully abstract, i.e. they have added the least amount of extra information to attain compositionality. We relate these two model to each other, thereby showing that they are isomorphic. We give comments on the relation of the models to other compositional models, which are not fully abstract.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. D. Brock and W. B. Ackerman. Scenarios: a model of non-determinate computation. In Diaz and Ramos, editors, Formalization of Programming Concepts, LNCS 107, pages 252–259, Springer Verlag, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  2. R. J. R. Back and H. Mannila. On the suitability of trace semantics for modular proofs of communicating processes. Theoretical Computer Science, 39(1):47–68, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  3. F. Boussinot. Proposition de semantique denotationelle pour des processus avec operateur de melange equitable. Theoretical Computer Science, 18(2):173–206, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. Broy. Fixed point theory for communication and concurrency. In Bjoerner, editor, Formal Description of Programming Concepts II, pages 125–146, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. Broy. Nondeterministic data flow programs: how to avoid the merge anomaly. Science of Computer Programming, 10:65–85, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Z.C. Chen and C.A.R. Hoare. Partial correctness of communicating processes and protocols. Technical Report PRG-20, Programming Research Group, Oxford University, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  7. B. Jonsson. Compositional Verification of Distributed Systems. PhD thesis, Dept. of Computer Systems, Uppsala University, Sweden, Uppsala, Sweden, 1987. Available as report DoCS 87/09.

    Google Scholar 

  8. B. Jonsson. A fully abstract trace model for dataflow networks. In Proceedings of the 16:th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 155–165, Austin, Texas, 1989. Available as SICS Research Report 88016.

    Google Scholar 

  9. G. Kahn. The semantics of a simple language for parallel programming. In IFIP 74, pages 471–475, North-Holland, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. M. Keller. Denotational models for parallel programs with indeterminate operators. In Neuhold, editor, Formal Descriptions of Programming Concepts, pages 337–366, North-Holland, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. N. Kok. Denotational semantics of nets with nondeterminism. In European Symposium on Programming, Saarbrücken, LNCS 206, pages 237–249, Springer Verlag, Saarbrücken, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. N. Kok. A fully abstract semantics for data flow nets. In Proc. PARLE, LNCS 259, pages 351–368, Springer Verlag, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J.N. Kok. Semantic Models for Parallel Computation in Data Flow, Logic and Object-Oriented Languages. PhD thesis, Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1989. To be defended May 11 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  14. P. R. Kosinski. A straight-forward denotational semantics for nondeterminate data flow programs. In Proc. 5th ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 214–219, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. M. Keller and P. Panangaden. Semantics of networks containing indeterminate operators. In Brookes, Roscoe, and Winskel, editors, Seminar on Concurrency 1984, LNCS 197, pages 479–496, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  16. R. M. Keller and P. Panangaden. Semantics of networks containing indeterminate operators. Distributed Computing, 1:235–245, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  17. N. A. Lynch and M. R. Tuttle. Hierarchical correctness proofs for distributed algorithms. In Proc. 6th ACM Symp. on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 137–151, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. Misra and K. M. Chandy. Proofs of networks of processes. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-7(4):417–426, July 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Misra. Reasoning about networks of communicating processes. In INRIA Advanced Nato Study Institute on Logics and Models for Verification and Specification of Concurrent Systems, La Colle sur Loupe, France, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Z. Manna and A. Pnueli. The temporal framework for concurrent programs. In Boyer and Moore, editors, The Correctness Problem in Computer Science, pages 215–274, Academic Press, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  21. D. Park. The ‘fairness’ problem and nondeterministic computing networks. In de Bakker and van Leeuwen, editors, Foundations of Computer Science IV, Part 2, pages 133–161, Amsterdam, 1983. Mathematical Centre Tracts 159.

    Google Scholar 

  22. G. Plotkin. A Structural Approach to Operational Semantics. Technical Report DAIMI FN-19, Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  23. V. R. Pratt. On the composition of processes. In Proc. 9th ACM Symp. in Principles of Programming Languages, pages 213–223, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  24. V. R. Pratt. The pomset model of parallel processes: unifying the temporal and the spatial. In Brookes, Roscoe, and Winskel, editors, Proc. Seminar on Concurrency, LNCS 197, pages 180–196, Springer Verlag, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  25. P. Panangaden and G. Stark. Computations, residuals, and the power of indeterminacy. In Lepisto and Salomaa, editors, ICALP 88, pages 133–161, Springer Verlag, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J. Staples and V. L. Nguyen. A fixpoint semantics for nondeterministic data flow. ACM Journal, 32(2):411–444, April 1985.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Swedish Institute of Computer Science, P.O. Box 1263, S-164 28, Kista, Sweden

    Bengt Jonsson

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Utrecht, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB, Utrecht, the Netherlands

    Joost N. Kok

Authors
  1. Bengt Jonsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joost N. Kok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Eddy Odijk Martin Rem Jean-Claude Syre

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1989 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Jonsson, B., Kok, J.N. (1989). Comparing two fully abstract dataflow models. In: Odijk, E., Rem, M., Syre, JC. (eds) PARLE '89 Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe. PARLE 1989. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 366. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-51285-3_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-51285-3_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-51285-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46184-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics