Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Testing-Based Abstractions for Value-Passing Systems

  • Conference paper
CONCUR ’94: Concurrency Theory (CONCUR 1994)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 836))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 537 Accesses

Abstract

This paper presents a framework for the abstract interpretation of processes that pass values. We define a process description language that is parameterized with respect to the set of values that processes may exchange and show that an abstraction over values induces an abstract semantics for processes. Our main results state that if the abstract value interpretation safely/optimally approximates the ground interpretation, then the resulting abstracted processes safely/optimally approximate those derived from the ground semantics (in a precisely defined sense). As the processes derived from an abstract semantics in general have far fewer states than those derived from a concrete semantics, our technique enables the automatic analysis of systems that lie beyond the scope of existing techniques.

Research supported by NSF/DARPA Grant CCR-9014775, NSF Grant CCR-9120995, ONR Young Investigator Award N00014-92-J-1582, and NSF Young Investigator Award CCR-9257963.

Research supported by ONR Contract N00014-92-C-0182.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

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. S. Bensalem, A. Bouajjani, C. Loiseaux, and J. Sifakis. Property-preserving simulations. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computer-Aided Verification, volume 663 of LNCS, pages 260–273. Springer-Verlag, June 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  2. B. Bloom and R. Paige. Computing ready simulations efficiently. In Proceedings of the North American Process Algebra Workshop Workshops in Computing, pages 119–134, Stony Brook, New York, August 1992. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Edmund M. Clarke, Orna Grumberg, and David E. Long. Model checking and abstraction. In Proceedings ACM POPL, pages 343–354, January 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  4. E.M. Clarke, E.A. Emerson, and A.P. Sistla. Automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications. ACM TOPLAS, 8 (2): 244–263, April 1986.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. R. Cleaveland. Tableau-based model checking in the propositional mu-calculus. Acta Informatica, 27 (8): 725–747, September 1990.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. R. Cleaveland and M.C.B. Hennessy. Testing equivalence as a bisimulation equivalence. Formal Aspects of Computing, 5: 1–20, 1993.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. R. Cleaveland, J. Parrow, and B. Steffen. The Concurrency Workbench: A semantics-based tool for the verification of finite-state systems. ACM TOPLAS, 15 (1): 36–72, January 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R. Cleaveland and B. Steffen. A linear-time model-checking algorithm for the alternation-free modal mu-calculus. Formal Methods in System Design, 2: 121–147, 1993.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Comparing the Galois connection and widening/narrowing approaches to abstract interpretation. In PULP ‘82, volume 631 of LNCS, pages 269–295. Springer-Verlag, August 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  10. D. Dams, O. Grumb erg, and R. Gerth. Abstract interpretation of reactive systems: Abstractions preserving VCTL’, 3CTL• and CTL’. In PROCOMET ‘84 IFIP Transactions. NorthHolland/Elsevier, June 1994. Full version available from Eindhoven University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. Goyer. Communications protocols for the B-HIVE multicomputer. Master’s thesis, North Carolina State University, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  12. E. Harcourt, J. Mauney, and T. Cook. Specification of instruction-level parallelism. In Proceedings of the North American Process Algebra Workshop August 1993. Technical Report TR93–1369, Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  13. M.C.B. Hennessy. Algebraic Theory of Processes. MIT Press, Boston, 1988.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. M.C.B. Hennessy and A. Ingólfsdóttir. A theory of communicating processes with value-passing. Information and Computation, 107: 202–236, December 1993.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. M.C.B. Hennessy and H. Lin. Symbolic bisimulations. Technical Report 1/92, Sussex University, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  16. C.A.R. Hoare. Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice-Hall, London, 1985.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. N.D. Jones and F. Nielson. Abstract Interpretation: a Semantics-Based Tool for Program Analysis. Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science. Oxford, To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  18. P. Kanellakis and S.A. Smolka. CCS expressions, finite state processes, and three problems of equivalence. Information and Computation, 86 (1): 43–68, May 1990.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. F. Nielson and H. Nielson. From CML to process algebras. In E. Best, editor, Proceedings of CONCUR ‘83, volume 715 of LNCS, pages 493–508, Hildesheim, Germany, August 1993. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  20. E.-R. Olderog and C.A.R. Hoare. Specification-oriented semantics for communicating processes. Acta Informatica, 23: 9–66, 1986.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. R. Paige and R.E. Tarjan. Three partition refinement algorithms. SIAM Journal of Computing, 16 (6): 973–989, December 1987.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. J. Parrow. Verifying a CSMA/CD-protocol with CCS. In Proceedings of the IFIP Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification pages 373–387, Atlantic City, New Jersey, June 1988. North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  23. J. Richier, C. Rodgrigues, J. Sifakis, and J. Voiron. Verification in XESAR of the sliding window protocol. In Proceedings of the IFIP Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification pages 235–250, Zurich, May 1987. North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  24. V. Roy and R. de Simone. Auto/Autograph. In Computer-Aided Verification ‘80 pages 235250, Piscataway, New Jersey, July 1990. American Mathematical Society.

    Google Scholar 

  25. C. Stirling and D. Walker. Local model checking in the modal mu-calculus. In TAPSOFT ‘89 volume 352 of LNCS pages 369–383, Barcelona, March 1989. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  26. R. van Glabbeek. The linear time–branching time spectrum. In Proceedings of CONCUR ‘80, volume 458 of LNCS, pages 278–297. Springer-Verlag, August 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  27. M. Vardi and P. Wolper. An automata-theoretic approach to automatic program verification. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Logic in Computer Science pages 332–344, Cambridge, Massachusetts, June 1986. Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. G. Winskel. A note on model checking the modal v-calculus. In Proceedings ICALP volume 372 of LNCS pages 761–772, Stresa, Italy, July 1989. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  29. P. Wolper. Expressing interesting properties of programs in propositional temporal logic. In Proceedings ACM POPL, pages 184–193, January 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  30. W.J. Yeh and M. Young. Compositional reachability analysis using process algebra. In TAV ‘81, pages 49–59. ACM SIGSOFT, ACM Press, October 1991.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Computer Science, N.C. State University, Raleigh, NC, 27695-8206, USA

    Rance Cleaveland & James Riely

  2. Dept. of Computer Science, University of N.C., Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-3175, USA

    Rance Cleaveland & James Riely

Authors
  1. Rance Cleaveland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Riely
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Systems, Uppsala University, P.O. Box 325, S-751 05, Uppsala, Sweden

    Bengt Jonsson

  2. Swedish Institute of Computer Science, P.O. Box 1262, S-164 28, Kista, Sweden

    Joachim Parrow

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1994 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Cleaveland, R., Riely, J. (1994). Testing-Based Abstractions for Value-Passing Systems. In: Jonsson, B., Parrow, J. (eds) CONCUR ’94: Concurrency Theory. CONCUR 1994. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 836. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-48654-1_31

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-48654-1_31

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-58329-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-48654-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics