Ferenc Bujtor
Abstract
Testing preorders on component specifications ensure that replacing a specification by a refined one does not introduce unwanted behavior in an overall system. Considering deadlocks as unwanted, the preorder can be characterized by a failure semantics on Labeled Transition Systems (LTSs). In previous work, we have generalized this to Modal Transition Systems (MTSs) with a new, MTS-specific testing idea. In the present article, we generalize this idea further to DMTS, a subclass of disjunctive MTSs. On the one hand, the testing preorder can be characterized by the same failure semantics, and dMTS have no additional expressivity in our setting. On the other hand, the technical treatment is significantly harder and, surprisingly, the preorder is not compositional.
Furthermore, we regard deadlocks and divergence (infinite unobservable runs) as unwanted and characterize the testing preorder with an unusual failure-divergence semantics. This preorder is already on LTSs strictly coarser—and hence arguably better—than the traditional failure-divergence preorder. It is a precongruence on dMTS, also for hiding, and much easier to handle than the deadlock-based preorder. It arises as well from a new variant of De Nicola’s and Hennessy’s must-testing.
- Bernd Baumgarten. 1987. On internal and external characterizations of PT-net building block behaviors. In Advances in Petri Nets 1988, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 340. Springer, 44--61. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Shoham Ben-David, Marsha Chechik, and Sebastián Uchitel. 2013. Merging partial behaviour models with different vocabularies. In CONCUR 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8052. Springer, 91--105. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nikola Beneš, Ivana Černá, and Jan Křetínský. 2011. Modal transition systems: Composition and LTL model checking. In ATVA 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6996. Springer, 228--242. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nikola Benes, Benoît Delahaye, Uli Fahrenberg, Jan Kretínský, and Axel Legay. 2013. Hennessy-Milner logic with greatest fixed points as a complete behavioural specification theory. In CONCUR 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8052. Springer, 76--90. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jan A. Bergstra, Jan W. Klop, and Ernst-Rüdiger Olderog. 1987. Failures without chaos: A new process semantics for fair abstraction. In Formal Description of Programming Concepts III. North-Holland, 77--103.Google Scholar
- Stephen D. Brookes, C. A. R. Hoare, and Andrew W. Roscoe. 1984. A theory of communicating sequential processes. J. ACM 31, 3 (1984), 560--599. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ferenc Bujtor and Walter Vogler. 2015a. Error-pruning in interface automata. Theor. Comput. Sci. 597 (2015), 18--39. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ferenc Bujtor and Walter Vogler. 2015b. Failure semantics for modal transition systems. ACM Trans. Embedded Comput. Syst. 14, 4, Article 67 (2015), 30 pages. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rocco De Nicola. 1987. Extensional equivalences for transition systems. Acta Inf. 24, 2 (1987), 211--237. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rocco De Nicola and Matthew Hennessy. 1984. Testing equivalences for processes. Theor. Comput. Sci. 34 (1984), 83--133. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Harald Fecher and Heiko Schmidt. 2008. Comparing disjunctive modal transition systems with an one-selecting variant. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 77, 1--2 (2008), 20--39.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Matthew Hennessy. 1988. Algebraic Theory of Processes. MIT Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hans Hüttel and Kim Guldstrand Larsen. 1989. The use of static constructs in a modal process logic. In Logic at Botik, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 363. Springer, 163--180. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kim G. Larsen, Ulrik Nyman, and Andrzej Wa̧sowski. 2007. On modal refinement and consistency. In CONCUR 2007, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 4703. Springer, 105--119. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kim G. Larsen and Liu Xinxin. 1990. Equation solving using modal transition systems. In LICS 1990. IEEE Computer Society, 108--117. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gerald Lüttgen and Walter Vogler. 2013a. Modal interface automata. Logical Meth. Comput. Sci. 9, 3 (2013). Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gerald Lüttgen and Walter Vogler. 2013b. Richer interface automata with optimistic and pessimistic compatibility. Electron, Comput. EASST 66 (2013).Google Scholar
- Robin Milner. 1989. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall. I--XI, 1--260 pages. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lev Sorokin. 2014. F-Semantik für Disjunktive Modale Transitionssysteme. B.Sc. thesis. Universität Augsburg.Google Scholar
- Antti Valmari. 1995a. Failure-based equivalences are faster than many believe. In Structures in Concurrency Theory (Workshops in Computing). Springer, 326--340. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Antti Valmari. 1995b. The weakest deadlock-preserving congruence. Inf. Process. Lett. 53, 6 (1995), 341--346. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Walter Vogler. 1989. Failures semantics and deadlocking of modular petri nets. Acta Inf. 26, 4 (1989), 333--348. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Walter Vogler. 1992. Modular Construction and Partial Order Semantics of Petri Nets, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 625. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Testing Preorders for dMTS: Deadlock- and the New Deadlock-/DivergenceTesting
Recommendations
Testing Preorders for dMTS: Deadlock- and the New Deadlock/Divergence-Testing
ACSD '15: Proceedings of the 2015 15th International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System DesignTesting preorders on component specifications ensure that replacing a specification by a refined one does not introduce unwanted behaviour in an overall system. Considering deadlocks as unwanted, the preorder can be characterized by a failure semantics ...
Compositional Testing Preorders for Probabilistic Processes
LICS '95: Proceedings of the 10th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer ScienceTransition systems are well-established as a semantic model for distributed systems. There are widely accepted preorders that serve as criteria for refinement of a more abstract transition system to a more concrete one. To reason about probabilistic ...
Testing probabilistic equivalence through Reinforcement Learning
Checking if a given system implementation respects its specification is often done by proving that the two are ''equivalent''. The equivalence is chosen, in particular, for its computability and of course for its meaning, that is, for its adequacy with ...
Comments