| B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232-268, January 1995. |
.... . We say that is weaker than , allowing more freedom to the implementer. Many preorders from literature (c.f. 8] are based upon some notion of nitary testing. Since no testing scenario can discriminate G and B in Figure 1, such preorders, like failures (c.f. 6] or ready simulation (c.f. [4]) satisfy B G: a good speci cation can have a bad implementation. Fair preorders, like fair testing (c.f. 5] 11] do not su er from this drawback, i.e. they discriminate G and B. These preorders assume that certain in nite behaviors cannot occur, although every approximating nite ....
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation Can't Be Traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232-268, 1995.
....Heide B. Monien, editors: Automata, Languages and Programming, Proc. 23 International Colloquium, ICALP 96, Paderborn, Germany, LNCS 1099, Springer, 1996, pp. 502 513. The first systematic study of transition system specifications with negative premises appears in Bloom, Istrail Meyer [2]. The concept of a (positive) TSS presented above was introduced in Groote Vaandrager [10] the negative premises t were added in Groote [9] The notion generalises the GSOS rule systems of [2] and constitutes the first formalisation of Plotkin s Structural Operational Semantics (SOS) 11] ....
.... study of transition system specifications with negative premises appears in Bloom, Istrail Meyer [2] The concept of a (positive) TSS presented above was introduced in Groote Vaandrager [10] the negative premises t were added in Groote [9] The notion generalises the GSOS rule systems of [2] and constitutes the first formalisation of Plotkin s Structural Operational Semantics (SOS) 11] that is su#ciently general to cover most of its applications. The premises t t # are added here, mainly for technical reasons. The following definition tells when a transition is provable from a ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
B. Bloom, S. Istrail & A.R. Meyer (1995): Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM 42(1), pp. 232--268.
....expressiveness or completeness in the context of synchronous calculi such as Meije [Sim85] and SCCS [Mil83] this time, in the context of preemption. Such a characterization will also make it possible to characterize classes of operators with good behaviors based on syntactic formats such as GSOS [BIM95], tyft [GV92] etc. Furthermore such frameworks would also lead to the study of canonical models from the operational models. Work supported by IFCPAR (Indo French Center for the Promotion of Advanced Research) New Delhi. EP ATR Group, IRISA, F 35042, Rennes, France, e mail: fpinchina, ....
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A. R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232--268, January 1995.
....LTSs in general (see [1] for an overview) Some rule formats guarantee that a behavioural equivalence relation is a congruence with respect to the LTS associated with a TSS, meaning that each function symbol respects this equivalence. For bisimulation equivalence there are the De Simone [26] GSOS [9] and ntyft ntyxt [10, 17, 18] formats. Furthermore, congruence formats have been developed for behavioural equivalences based on decorated traces [6, 8, 12, 29] and weak bisimulations [7, 13, 27, 28] Let a TSS and its signature be extended with new transition rules and function symbols, ....
....hypothesis. Concluding, p is finitely branching. In short, the LTS associated to R is bounded nondeterministic because every state p T (#) is finitely branching. # 4 Applications The bounded nondeterminism format from Definition 10 subsumes the De Simone format [26] and the GSOS format [9]. Furthermore, TSSs in De Simone or GSOS format always allow a strict stratification (see Definition 14) So by Theorem 1, bounded TSSs in De Simone or GSOS format generate bounded nondeterministic LTSs. See for instance [1] for examples of TSSs from the literature that satisfy the restrictions of ....
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232--268, 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232-268, January 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232--268, January 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232--268, January 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232-268, 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, A. Meyer, Bisimulation can't be traced, Journal of the ACM 42 (1) (1995) 232--268.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232-- 268, jan 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A. R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of ACM, 42:232--268, 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232-- 268, 1995.
No context found.
Bard Bloom, Sorin Istrail, and Albert R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 42(1):232--268, January 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232--268, 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232-268, 1995.
No context found.
Bard Bloom, Sorin Istrail, and Albert R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232--268, January 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, A. Meyer, Bisimulation can't be traced, Journal of the ACM 42 (1) (1995) 232--268.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A. Meyer, Bisimulation can't be traced, J. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 42 (1995), pp. 232--268.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232-268, 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of ACM, 42(1):232--268, 1995.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232--268, 1995.
No context found.
B. S. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A. R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, 1988.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail & A.R. Meyer (1995): Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM 42(1), pp. 232-268.
No context found.
B. Bloom, S. Istrail, and A.R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journ. ACM, 42(1):232--268, 1988.
No context found.
Bard Bloom, Sorin Istrail, and Albert R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. Journal of the ACM, 42(1):232--268, January 1995.
First 50 documents Next 50
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