Abstract
This paper describes a method for merging behavior specifications modeled by transition systems. Given two behavior specificationsB1 andB2, Merge (B1,B2) defines a new behavior specification that extendsB1 andB2. Moreover, provided that a necessary and sufficient condition holds, Merge(B1,B2) is a cyclic extension ofB1 andB2. In other words, Merge (B1,B2) extendsB1 andB2, and any cyclic trace inB1 orB2 remains a cyclic in Merge(B1,B2). Therefore, in the case of cyclic traces ofB1 orB2, Merge(B1,B2) transforms into Merge(B1,B2), and may exhibit, in a recursive manner, behaviors ofB1 andB2. If Merge(B1,B2) is a cyclic extension ofB1 andB2, then Merge(B1,B2) represents the least common cyclic extension ofB1 andB2. This approach is useful for the extension and integration of system specifications.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
E. Brinksma, G. Scollo, and S. Steenbergen, “LOTOS Specifications, Their Implementations and Their Tests,”Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification, Sarikaya and Bochmann (eds.), Montréal, Canada, June 1986.
S.D. Brookes and A.W. Roscoe, “An Improved Failure Model for Communicating Sequential Processes,”Proceedings of the NSF-SERC Seminar on Concurrency, Springer-Verlag LNCS 197, 1985.
R. De Nicola,and M. Hennessy, “Testing equivalences for processes,”Theo. Comp. Sci., 34:83–133, 1984.
R. De Nicola, “Extensional Equivalences for Transition Systems,”Acta Informatica, 24:211–237, 1987.
R. Cleaveland and M. Hennessy, “Testing Equivalence as Bisimulation Equivalence,”Formal Aspects of Computing, 5:1–20, 1993.
K. Drira, “Tranformation et composition de graphes de refus: analyse de la testabilité,” Doctorat Thesis, Université de Toulouse, 1992.
M. Hennessy, “Acceptances Trees,”J. of ACM, Vol. 32, No. 4:896–928, Oct. 1985.
M Hennessy,Algebraic Theory for Processes, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1988.
J.E. Hopcroft and J.D. Ullman,Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation, Addison-Wesley, p. 418, 1979.
H. Ichikawa, K. Yamanaka, and J. Kato, “Incremental Specification in LOTOS,”Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification X (1990), Ottawa, Canada, Logrippo, Probert and Ural (eds.).
ISO—Information Processing Systems—Open Systems Interconnection, LOTOS—A Formal Description Technique Based on the Temporal Ordering of Observational Behaviour, DIS 8807, 1987.
F. Khendek and G.v. Bochmann, “Incremental Construction Approach for Distributed System Specifications,”Proceedings of the Int. Symp. on Formal Description Techniques, Boston, Mas., 26–29 Oct., 1993.
G. Leduc, “On the role of Implementation Relations in the Design of Distributed systems using LOTOS,” Doctoral Dissertation, Liège, Belgium.
R. Keller, “Formal verification of parallel programs,”Comm. of the ACM 19, pp. 371–384, July 1976.
H.A. Lin, “Constructing Protocols with Alternative Functions,”IEEE Transactions on Computer, Vol. 40, No. 4, April 1991.
T. Mayr,Specification of object-oriented systems in LOTOS, FORTE, Stirling, 1988.
R. Milner,Communication and Concurrency, Prentice-Hall, 1989.
D. Park, “Concurrency and Automata in Infinite Strings,” Lecture Notes in Computer Science 104, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1981, pp. 67–183.
S. Rudkin,Inheritance in LOTOS, Formal description technique—FORTE, Sydney, Australia, 1991, pp. 415–430.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a grant from the Canadian Institute for Telecommunications Research under the NCE program of the Govemment of Canada and by an IBM research fellowship.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Khendek, F., Bochmann, G.V. Merging behavior specifications. Form Method Syst Des 6, 259–293 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01384500
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01384500