J. Parrow and B. Victor. The Update Calculus. In Proc. of AMAST'97, LNCS 1349, Springer-Verlag, 1997. 14  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....between reductions in the ae calculi and in the encodings. Finally in Section 5 we conclude and give some directions for future work. Related work: The separation of binding and update in process calculi was, to our knowledge, first done independently by Fu [1] with his calculus and by us [8] with the update calculus. The update calculus turned out not to generalize to a polyadic calculus (where more than one name at a time can be transmitted) and therefore we developed it further into the fusion calculus [7] The Oz programming language is not only a concurrent constraint ....

J. Parrow and B. Victor. The update calculus. In M. Johnson, editor, Proceedings of AMAST'97, volume 1349 of LNCS, pages 409--423. Springer, Dec. 1997.

....link c . b j b . c in place of c . b, is given in [19] 6.2. The delayed input In an asynchronous calculus message emission is non blocking. Milner, Parrow, Victor and others have advocated also non blocking message reception (which is among the motivations for the Update and the Fusion calculi [31, 32] and, implicitely for the Chi calculus [14] Such a delayed input prex , written a(x)P , should allow the continuation P to evolve underneath the input guard, except for observable actions along x. The delayed input replaces temporal precedencies, imposed by plain input, with causal dependencies. ....

J. Parrow and B. Victor. The update calculus. In Proc. AMAST '97, volume 1349 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Verlag, 1997.

....is the polyadic input of the same name twice: z)u zz j P . Here any two names emitted by P along u will be fused, even if they are bound in P , for example (z)u zz j u vw : P fv=wg Gamma P A similar effect is obtained by two monadic inputs in (z)uz : uz j P Related work: Our earlier work [PV97] attacks some of these problems in a monadic calculus where only one object is transmitted in each interaction. The main result there, the update calculus, unfortunately turned out not to generalize to polyadic interactions. The reason is that updates (like substitutions) are directed, and it is ....

....a the maximal arity of communication actions in P , Q. Then by Lemma 11, R is a hyperbisimulation. Thus there can not exist a larger (or weaker ) bisimulation congruence than hyperequivalence for the fusion calculus. To relate the fusion calculus to its monadic predecessor, the update calculus [PV97], we regard both a monadic fusion prefix fx = yg : P and an update prefix [x=y] P as defined by (u) u x j uy : P ) where u is fresh) Theorem 12 For P and Q monadic fusion calculus processes, it holds that if P Q in the update calculus, then P Q in the fusion calculus. Proof: We show that S ....

J. Parrow and B. Victor. The update calculus. In Proceedings of AMAST'97, volume 1349 of LNCS. Springer, 1997. Full version available as Technical report DoCS 97/93, Uppsala University.

....is the polyadic input of the same name twice: z)u zz j P Here any two names emitted by P along u will be fused, even if they are bound in P , for example (z)u zz j u vw : P fv=wg Gamma P A similar effect is obtained by two monadic inputs in (z)uz : uz j P . Related work: Our earlier work [11] attacks some of these problems in a monadic calculus where only one object is transmitted in each interaction. The main result there, the update calculus, unfortunately turned out not to generalize to polyadic interactions. The reason is that updates (like substitutions) are directed, and it is ....

....This demonstrates that open equivalence is not a congruence in the fusion calculus, and that this context cannot be encoded compositionally in the calculus. A similar argument holds for the monadic (z)uz : uz. Finally, to relate the fusion calculus to its monadic predecessor, the update calculus [11], we regard both a monadic fusion prefix fx = yg : P and an update prefix [x=y] P as defined by (u) u x j uy : P ) where u is fresh) Theorem 4 For P and Q monadic fusion calculus processes, it holds that if P Q in the update calculus, then P Q in the fusion calculus. The reverse does not ....

J. Parrow and B. Victor. The update calculus. In Proceedings of AMAST'97, volume 1349 of LNCS. Springer, 1997.

....between reductions in the ae calculi and in the encodings. Finally in Section 5 we conclude and give some directions for future work. Related work: The separation of binding and update in process calculi was, to our knowledge, first done independently by Fu [Fu97] with his calculus and by us [PV97] with the update calculus. The update calculus turned out not to generalize to a polyadic calculus (where more than one name at a time can be transmitted) and therefore we developed it further into the fusion calculus [PV98] The Oz programming language is not only a concurrent constraint ....

J. Parrow and B. Victor. The update calculus. In M. Johnson, ed, Proceedings of AMAST'97, volume 1349 of LNCS, pages 409--423. Springer, Dec. 1997.

No context found.

J. Parrow and B. Victor. The Update Calculus. In Proc. of AMAST'97, LNCS 1349, Springer-Verlag, 1997. 14

No context found.

J. Parrow and B. Victor. The update calculus. In Proc. AMAST '97, volume 1349 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Verlag, 1997.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC