Ehrig, H., Pfender, M., Schneider, H.J.: Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In Book, R.V., ed.: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, University of Iowa, IEEE Computer Society Press (1973) 167-- 180  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....to CSP. Thereafter, critical pairs are defined and the critical pair lemma is stated. Lastly, the critical pairs in our example are discussed and the available tool support is described. 2 Typed attributed graph transformation Next, we present the algebraic double pushout (DPO) approach [5] to the transformation of typed attributed graphs [2] The two basic ingredients are graphs, representing object structures, and algebras representing pre defined abstract data types. Attributed graphs occur at two levels: the type level (modelling a schema or class diagram) and the instance level ....

....for attributes modelled inside a compartment of a class vertex. In the following, we will use this short hand for space reasons and conformity with UML syntax. Graph transformation. The DPO approach to graph transformation has originally been developed for vertex and edge labeled graphs [5]. Here, we present the typed version [2] extended to attributed graphs. According to the DPO approach, graph transformation rules (also called graph productions) are specified by pairs of injective graph morphisms (L R) called rule spans. The left hand side L contains the items that must ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--

....(types and attributes) which presents attribute values as vertices and attributes as edges, thus formalising typed graph transformation with attributes as a special case of typed graph transformation. Next, we give a light weight (set theoretic) presentation of the categorical DPO approach [9] to the transformation of typed graphs [6] 4.1 Typed graph transformation In typed graph transformation, graphs occur at two levels: the type level and the instance level [6] A fixed type graph (which may be thought of as an abstract representation of a class diagram) determines a set of ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180. IEEE, 1973.

....) also e 2 codom(mj Lndom(r) holds. This condition ensures, that the complete structural context of the elements in G to be deleted, is described in L, i.e. no dangling edges can occur. As opposed to the Single Pushout approach the older Double Pushout approach makes use of a gluing graph [EPS73] A graph rule is thus a tuple (L; K;R) and K, typically a subgraph of both L and R, describes the part of the left hand side that is to be preserved by an application of the rule. A rule is applicable to a host graph G if G contains a homomorphic image of L. In the rst step, the application of ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. J. Schneider. Graph-grammars: An algebraic approach. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167-180, Iowa City, IA, USA, October 1973.

....The projection to M given by M.sendCFP(C1) M.sendCFP(C2) M.recordProp(P2) M.recordProp(P1) M.acceptProp(P1) is clearly compatible with the behavior specified by the Manager s state diagram. 2 This is a set theoretic presentation of DPO rewriting, and like in the categorical definition [4] the resulting graph H is only determined up to isomorphism by the rule m(a) L R and the occurrence oj L : L G. Depke et al. Agent Based Systems and Graph Processes 6 4 Requirement Specification In many OO development processes, the design model is preceded by a requirement specification ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180. IEEE, 1973.

....4. Comparison of double and single pushout rewriting in (H) 9 5. Comparison of double and single pushout rewriting of jungles. 11 6. Further developments. 13 7. Concluding remarks. 14 References 15 1. Two definitions of graph rewriting. There is a long tradition of graph rewriting (e.g. [EPS73, ER80, PEM86, and others]) in which the concept is defined in the following category theoretic way: A rewrite rule is a pair of morphisms LKR in a category of graphs. L is called the left hand side of the rule, R is the right hand side, and K is the interface graph. An occurrence of this rule in a graph G is a morphism ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider "Graph-grammars: an algebraic approach", Proc. IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, 167--180, 1973.

....supported by the Italian National Council for Research (CNR GNIM) by the Polish Academy of Sciences (IPI PAN) and by COMPUGRAPH Basic Research Esprit Working Group n. 7183. 1 rewrite graphs of very general types, including hypergraphs, coloured hypergraphs, relational structures, etc. cf. EPS 73] CER 79] EKMRW 82] ENR 83] ENRR 87] EKR 91] This theory in its pure form does not assume anything about where and in what order to apply productions. In this situation at each stage of rewriting an independent search of an applicable rule and of a place of application must be done, ....

Ehrig, H., Pfender, H., Schneider, H. J., Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach, Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, Iowa City 1973, pp.167-180.

....of analysis techniques based on structural induction. Research partly supported by the EC TMR Network GETGRATS (General Theory of Graph Transformation Systems) through the Technical University of Berlin and the University of Pisa. In the double pushout (DPO) approach to graph transformation [15, 13] (and in most of the other approaches) the operational definition is by far more popular. Inductive definitions of DPO graph transformation have been given in [1, 12] but they do not have the same role as in the theory of term rewriting. One reason may be that, unlike for strings and terms, there ....

....used to provide an alternative presentation of graph transformation, which we will prove equivalent to the traditional one. 4. 1 Basic notions of double pushout Historically, the first of the algebraic approaches to graph transformation is the so called double pushout (DPO) approach introduced in [15], which owes its name to the basic construction used to define a single derivation step, modeled indeed by two gluing diagrams (i.e. pushouts) in the category DCG of concrete graphs. Definition 13 (graph productions) A graph production p : s is composed of a production name p and of a span of ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph-grammars: an algebraic approach. In Proceedings IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, pages 167--180, 1973.

....structure [3,7,8,10,16,25 27,29,30] Often such categorical models of rewriting do not only axiomatise the rewrite relation but impose an equivalence on rewriting sequences which captures the basic concurrency properties of the system. In the double pushout (DPO) approach to graph transformation [11,15] the operational definition is by far more popular. Inductive definitions of DPO graph transformation have been given but they are not as well accepted as, e.g. in the theory of term rewriting. One reason may be that, unlike for strings and terms, there is no straightforward inductive definition ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph-grammars: an algebraic approach. In R.V. Book, editor, Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167-- 180. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1973. 16 Gadducci

....this is not the case give modified results. In particular, for the most general approach with injective matching and arbitrary right hand morphisms, we establish sequential and parallel commutativity by appropriately strengthening sequential and parallel independence. 1 Introduction In [EPS73] the first paper on double pushout graph transformation, matching morphisms are required to be injective. But the vast majority of later papers on the double poushout approach including the surveys [Ehr79, CMR 97] considers arbitrary matching morphisms. Despite this tradition, sometimes ....

Hartmut Ehrig, Michael Pfender, Hans Jurgen Schneider. Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, 167--180, 1973.

....in diagram (b) We assume that H 1 = L, H 2 = J and H 0 = G. In the same way we can describe H as a pushout of D 1 and the canonical strong morphism from m 1 into R. Now assume we can transform G into H by applying the production span L m R in the double pushout approach. In [4] it was shown that every double pushout can be converted into a double pushout where the middle graph in the production span is discrete. We can also assume that all its nodes are external, that it is therefore isomorphic to m and that there are strong morphisms L : m L and R : m R. A ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider. Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In Proc. 14th IEEE Symp. on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167-180, 1973.

....object really exists an existence projection. Structural Constraint Satisfaction This section describes the concept of structural constraint satisfaction. For a more detailed presentation, please refer to (Nareyek 1999a) and (Nareyek 1999b) The concept is based on algebraic graph grammars (Ehrig, Pfender Schneider 1973; Rozenberg 1997) A structural constraint satisfaction problem can be used to overcome the deficiencies of conventional CSPs with respect to structural variety. In an SCSP, the constraint graph is not explicitly given. Only the types of constraints (together with their possible connections) and ....

Ehrig, H.; Pfender, M.; and Schneider, H. J. 1973. Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory (SWAT), 167--180.

.... but also by a graph) and a better reflection of the local nature and the context dependence of state changes (each change of state can be represented by rewriting of a small part of the respective graph at the presence of a context) A graph rewriting system in the sense of algebraic approach of [EPS 73] has rules called graph productions, where a rule p says that a certain pattern L p can be replaced by another pattern R p if it occurs in a graph. A graph rewriting system which has also a distinguished initial graph is called a graph grammar. Concrete forms of graph productions, and ....

Ehrig, H., Pfender, H., Schneider, H. J., Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach, Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, Iowa City, 1973, 167-180

....graph grammar, which is generically produced using the problem definition. Structural constraints allow to formulate restrictions on admissible constraint graphs. 2.1 Graph Grammars This section provides a more or less informal introduction in algebraic graph grammars. Please have a look at [ Ehrig et al. 1973; Rozenberg et al. 1997; Habel et al. 1996 ] for a detailed overview. Algebraic graph grammars are a generalization of Chomsky grammars. A graph signature GSig consists of the sorts of vertices V , edges E, and a label alphabet L. The operations of GSig provide source and target vertices for ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender and H. J. Schneider. Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory (SWAT), pages 167--180, 1973.

....based on an algebraic graph grammar, which is generically produced using the problem definition. Structural constraints allow us to formulate restrictions on admissible constraint graphs. 2. 1 Graph Grammars This section gives a fairly informal introduction to algebraic graph grammars (see [ Ehrig et al. 1973; Rozenberg et al. 1997; Habel et al. 1996 ] for a detailed overview) Algebraic graph grammars are a generalization of Chomsky grammars. A graph signature GSig consists of the sorts of vertices V , edges E, and a label alphabet L. The operations of GSig provide source and target vertices for ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender and H. J. Schneider. Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory (SWAT), pages 167--180, 1973.

....with deeper insight into the underlying structure of variable binding and variable identity. 2. 4 Algebraic Term Graph Rewriting Term graph rewriting has been introduced in the operational definition of graph reduction by Wadsworth [43] since the development of the algebraic approach to rewriting [15], however, most new developments have come from within this algebraic approach. The original version of the algebraic approach is founded upon the double pushout 266 Relational Treatment of Term Graphs With Bound Variables rewriting scheme: L # G # R A # # H # # B # Here a rule L # ....

Hartmut Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. J. Schneider. Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In Proc. IEEE Conf. SWAT'73, pages 167--180, Iowa City, 1973. 302 Relational Treatment of Term Graphs With Bound Variables

....graphs and are thus interesting as a means to manipulate query answers and the whole database. The basic idea is the rule based manipulation of graphs. These rules, together with an initial work graph, are called a graph grammar. Graph transformations have been a subject since the early 70s ( 16] [17]) To name two systems, RWTH Aachen s PROGRES [18] focuses on an executable specification language based on graph rewriting systems. It uses EER like class diagrams for the definition of complex object structures. Among its applications are process modeling and reengineering tools. TU Berlin s AGG ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180, 1973.

....also known as graph rewriting or graph reduction, combines the potentials and advantages of both, graphs and rules, into a single computational paradigm. More than 25 years ago, Rosenfeld et al. PR69, RM72] in the USA, and Schneider, Ehrig, Pfender, and Wadsworth [Sch70, Sch71, Wad71, EPS73] in Europe introduced graph transformation for the generation, manipulation, recognition, and evaluation of graphs. Since then graph transformation has been studied in a variety of approaches, motivated by application domains such as pattern recognition, semantics of programming languages, ....

Hartmut Ehrig, Michael Pfender, and Hans Jurgen Schneider. Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, 167--180, Iowa City, 1973.

....theorems can be derived about properties of derivations, i.e. sequences of rewriting steps. Abstract consideration of single rewriting steps, i.e. an abstract specification of how rewriting rules are to be applied, can be found most prominently in the algebraic approach to (graph) rewriting of [Ehrig et al. 1973; Ehrig, 1978] There, the starting point is to consider a category 1 with graphs as objects and appropriate graph homomorphisms as arrows, and then the category theoretic pushout construction is employed for the information transfer. In the survey and tutorial paper [Ehrig et al. 1990b] the ....

Hartmut Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. J. Schneider. Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In Proc. IEEE Conf. SWAT'73, pages 167--180, Iowa City, 1973.

....also known as graph rewriting or graph reduction, combines the potentials and advantages of both, graphs and rules, into a single computational paradigm. More than 25 years ago, Rosenfeld et al. PR69, RM72] in the USA, and Schneider, Ehrig, Pfender, and Wadsworth [Sch70, Sch71, Wad71, EPS73] in Europe introduced graph transformation for the generation, manipulation, recognition, and evaluation of This work was partially supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and the ESPRIT Basic Research Working Group No. 7183: Computing by Graph Transformation (COMPUGRAPH II) y The ....

Hartmut Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, 167--180, Iowa City, 1973.

....some notation for replicated nodes and edges. We now briefly review three main gluing models: the algebraic model (Section#A.5.1) edge replacement systems (Section#A.5.2) and hyperedge replacement systems (Section#A.5.3) A.5. 1 The Algebraic Approach The algebraic approach to graph grammars ([EhPS73], Ehri87] EhKL91] was first proposed in 1973 as a way of generalizing string concatenation to a graph operation. It is also referred to in the graph grammar literature as the Berlin approach. Ehrig et al. extend the approach from graphs to more general structures such as partial graphs ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, H. J. Schneider, "Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach," Proc. IEEE Conf. SWAT `73, Iowa City, 1973, pp. 167-180.

....also generic concerning the connection of components. One of the key concepts of our framework is a generic notion of transformations of speci cations, especially motivated by but not limited to rule based transformations in the sense of graph transformation and high level replacement systems [12, 7, 26]. According to the general requirement that components are self contained units not only on the syntactical but also on the semantical level, we are able to de ne the semantics of each component independently of other components in the system. This semantics is also given in terms of ....

....would only exist when the given trafo is consistent with i 1 in a speci c sense. For instance, in the case of graph transformations, the extension property corresponds to the embedding of a transformation into a larger context. The corresponding embedding theorem 8 H. Ehrig, F. Orejas, et al. in [12] requires that the boundary of i 1 has to be preserved by trafo. Again, for the sake of simplicity, in this paper we drop this consistency condition. 3.4 Transformation Semantics of Components According to the general requirements, components are self contained units, with respect to syntax ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, H. Schneider. Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach. In Proc. SWAT '73, pp.167 - 180.

....is also generic concerning the connection of components. The key concept of our framework is a generic notion of transformations of speci cations, especially motivated by but not limited to rule based transformations in the sense of graph transformation and high level replacement systems [8, 5, 19]. According to the general requirement that components are self contained units not only on the syntactical but also on the semantical level, we are able to de ne the semantics of each component independently of other components in the system. This semantics is also given in terms of ....

....required that these extensions would only exist when the given trafo is consistent with i 1 in a speci c sense. For instance, in the case of graph transformations, the extension property corresponds to the embedding of a transformation into a larger context. The corresponding embedding theorem in [8] requires that the boundary of i 1 has to be preserved by trafo. Again, for the sake of simplicity, in this paper we drop this consistency condition. If transformations and inclusions of speci cations can be considered as suitable morphisms in a category of speci cations, then the extension ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, H. Schneider. Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach. In Proc. SWAT '73, pp.167 - 180.

....an occurrence of its left hand side with its right hand side. The form of graph productions and the mechanisms stating how a production can be applied to a graph and what the resulting graph is, depend on the specific formalism. In this paper we use the algebraic, Double Pushout (DPO) approach [1,2]. The classical theory of the DPO approach is mainly concerned with structural properties and the sequential and parallel composition of transformation Research partially supported by the German Research Council (DFG) and the TMR network GETRATS A. Corradini is on leave from Dipartimento ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider, "Graph grammars: an algebraic approach, " in 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pp. 167--180, IEEE, 1973.

....with its right hand side. The form of graph productions and the mechanisms stating how a production can be applied to a graph and what the resulting graph is, depend on the specific formalism. Among the various formulations of graph transformation, the algebraic, Double Pushout (DPO) approach [1, 2] is one of the most successful, mainly because of its flexibility. In fact, since the basic notions of production and direct derivation are defined in terms of diagrams and constructions in a category, they can be defined in a uniform way for a wide range of structures. Moreover, many results can ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider, "Graph grammars: an algebraic approach," in 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pp. 167--180, IEEE, 1973.

....in the DPO approach is given, whereas [EHK 96] deals with the SPO approach. Tutorial introductions can be found in [Ehr87] and [EKL91] A survey of transformational and algorithmic aspects of the algebraic approach to hypergraph grammars is given in [Hab92b] The Double PushOut Approach In [EPS73] the algebraic approach based on homomorphisms and pushout constructions to graph grammars has been first introduced. For the basic notions see also [Ehr79] The gluing (given by a double pushout, more details in [EK79] of arbitrarily labeled graphs is defined allowing a strictly symmetric ....

....in multidimensional structures which can be represented as labeled graphs. On the one hand this concept generalizes Lindenmayer systems, usually defined for strings, to labeled graphs, yet on the other hand this is the parallel version of the algebraic approach to graph grammars as given in [EPS73] A comparison to other approaches to parallel graph grammars can be found in [ER76] The concurrent manipulation is dealt with in [ER78] Given a sequence of manipulation rules together with dependence relations one can construct a single concurrent manipulation rule with the following ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180, 1973. 36

....composition. The concepts and results are illustrated by a sample development of a small information system using entity relationship modeling techniques. 1. Introduction Graph transformation systems have been introduced since the late sixties, see (Pfaltz and Rosenfeld, 1969; Montanari, 1970; Ehrig et al. 1973). They provide an intuitive description for the manipulation of graphs and graphical structures as they occur in many areas of computer science like programming language semantics, data bases, operating systems, rule based systems, and various kinds of software and distributed systems. Among the ....

.... mechanism by means of an example, namely the modeling of entity relationship specifications by graph transformation systems (compare (Claen and Lowe, 1995) Historically, the first of the algebraic approaches to graph transformation is the socalled double pushout (DPO) approach introduced in (Ehrig et al. 1973), which owes its name to the basic algebraic construction used to define a direct derivation step: This is modeled indeed by two gluing diagrams (i.e. pushouts) in the category of graphs and total graph morphisms. More recently a second algebraic approach has been proposed in (Lowe, 1993) which ....

Ehrig, H., Pfender, M., and Schneider, H. J. (1973). Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180.

....it is closed by a comparison between the two approaches. 1 Introduction The algebraic approach to graph grammars has been invented at the Technical University of Berlin in the early seventies by H. Ehrig, M. Pfender and H.J. Schneider in order to generalize Chomsky grammars from strings to graphs [1]. The main idea was to generalize the concatenation of strings to a gluing construction for graphs. This allowed to formulate a graph rewriting step by two gluing constructions. The approach was called algebraic because graphs are considered as special kinds of algebras and the gluing for graphs ....

.... systems [14] applied software systems [15] implementation of abstract data types [16] and context free hyperedge replacement [17] see also [18] in this book) Historically, the first of the algebraic approaches to graph transformation is the so called double pushout (DPO) approach introduced in [1], which owes its name to the basic algebraic construction used to define a direct derivation step: This is modelled indeed by two gluing diagrams (i.e. pushouts) in the category of graphs and total graph morphisms. More recently a second algebraic approach has been proposed in [5] which defines ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph-grammars: an algebraic approach. In Proceedings IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, pages 167--180, 1973.

.... equivalent to directed acyclic graphs, as discussed in [CMR 91] In this section we introduce the category of jungles (see also [HP91] and the basic definitions of jungle rewriting, which is a specific graph rewriting formalism defined along the lines of the double pushout approach ( EPS73, CMR 96] Now we present the formal definitions for hypergraphs and jungles: Definition 4.4.1 (hypergraphs) A hypergraph H over SIG is a tuple H = V; E; src; trg; m; l) where V is a set of nodes, E is a set of hyperedges, src and trg : E V are the source and target functions, l : ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180, 1973.

....with its right hand side. The form of graph productions and the mechanisms stating how a production can be applied to a graph and what the resulting graph is, depend on the specific formalism. Among the various formulations of graph transformation, the algebraic, Double Pushout (DPO) approach [EPS73,Ehr79] is one of the most successful, mainly because of its flexibility. In fact, since the basic notions of production and direct derivation are defined in terms of diagrams and constructions in a Research partially supported by the German Research Council (DFG) and the TMR network GETGRATS ....

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180. IEEE, 1973.

No context found.

Ehrig, H., Pfender, M., Schneider, H.J.: Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In Book, R.V., ed.: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, University of Iowa, IEEE Computer Society Press (1973) 167-- 180

No context found.

Ehrig, H., M. Pfender and H. Schneider, Graph grammars: an algebraic approach, in: 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory (1973), pp. 167-180.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider. Graph-grammars: an algebraic approach. In IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, pages 167--180, 1973.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180. IEEE, 1973.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180. IEEE, 1973.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider. Graph-grammars: an algebraic approach. In IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, pages 167--180, 1973.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph-grammars: an algebraic approach. In R.V. Book, editor, Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167{ 180. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1973.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180. IEEE, 1973.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.-J. Schneider. Graph grammars: An algebraic approach. In Ronald V. Book, editor, Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180, University of Iowa, October 1973. IEEE Computer Society Press.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H.J. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--

No context found.

Ehrig, H., Pfender, H., Schneider, H. J., Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach, Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, Iowa City (1973) 167180

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180. IEEE, 1973.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, H.-J. Schneider, Graph grammars : an algebraic approach, Proc. 14th Annual IEEE Symp. Switch. Automat. Theory, Iowa City (1973), 167180.

No context found.

Ehrig, H., Pfender, H., Schneider, H. J., Graph Grammars: An Algebraic Approach, Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Automata and Switching Theory, Iowa City (1973) 167180

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, and H. Schneider. Graph grammars: an algebraic approach. In 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pages 167--180. IEEE, 1973.

No context found.

H. Ehrig, M. Pfender, H.-J. Schneider, Graph grammars : an algebraic approach, Proc. 14th Annual IEEE Symp. Switch. Automat. Theory, Iowa City (1973), 167180.

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