H. Barringer, R. Kuiper and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Washington D. C., April, 1984. 106  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....constraints on events (described below) of different services. is an event based linear temporal logic effectively, propositional logic augmented with the before ( temporal operator. Before is formally a dual of the more conventional until operator; it was studied as the chop operator [2]. Because of its similarity with sequence composition in imperative programming languages, the chop facilitates compositional specifications. Here, before is used to state minimal ordering requirements so as to facilitate compositionality. can capture a remarkable variety of coordination ....

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. Proc. ACM Symp. Theory of Computing, pp 51--63. 1984.

....the behaviour of processes. This means that the truth of an assertion for a composition of processes can be deduced from the truth of certain assertions for the components of the composition. Most research papers in this area focus on a particular process algebra. Barringer, Kuiper Pnueli [3] present (a preliminary version of) a compositional proof system for concurrent programs, which is based on a rich temporal logic, including operators from process logic [10] and LTL [20] For modelling concurrent programs they define a language including assignment, conditional and while ....

.... composition, to decide the validity of formulae from Hennessy Milner Logic (HML) 11] In Stirling [23, 24] the results from [22] are extended, creating proof systems for subsets of CCS and SCCS [18] including asynchronous and synchronous parallelism and infinite behaviour, using ideas from [3]. In Stirling [25] the proposals in [23, 24] are generalised to be able to cope with the restriction operator. In Winskel [26] a method is given to decompose formulae with respect to each operation in SCCS. The language of assertions is HML with infinite conjunction and disjunction. This ....

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper & A. Pnueli (1984): Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC '84), ACM Press, Baltimore, USA, pp. 51--63.

....environment. Such specifications are called assume guarantee specifications, because they guarantee behavior when the environment satisfies some assumptions. Logics for verifying safety properties of assume guarantee specifications are discussed in [9, 14, 21] liveness properties are treated in [1, 3, 23]; and model checking techniques based on assume guarantee specifications are introduced in [6, 11] Our approach differs from this open systems work both in the role played by the environment and in how state changes are made by the environment. We use the environment to represent aspects of the ....

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In 16th Annual ACM Aymposium on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63, 1984.

....and Pnueli [24] Manna and Pnueli in [25] advocate using temporal logic along with invariance and well foundedness. What s new in this paper is a systematic method for reducing a temporal property to nontemporal proof obligations. Other investigations into decomposing temporal properties include [3], 10] 12] 27] 28] and [33] Most of that work is concerned with decomposing various classes of global temporal properties of a system into local properties of the system components, resulting in so called compositional proof systems. The work in [10] is most similar to ours in that ....

BARRINGER, H., KUIPER, g., AND PNUELI, A. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Symposium on Theory of Computing (Washington, D.C., Apr.

....to the more operational setting of Unity [CM88] specifications. Alur and Henzinger [AH96] and McMillan [McM97] present assume guarantee proof rules for hardware components. A number of other compositional proof rules not based on assume guarantee reasoning have also been proposed, such as [BKP84, CM88, MP95] Yahav [Yah01] describes a method to model check multithreaded programs using a 3 valued logic [SRW99, LAS00] to abstract the store. This technique can verify interesting properties of small programs. Pasareanu et al. PDH99] also describe a model checking tool for compositional ....

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal-logic specifications. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63. ACM Press, 1984.

....of the system and still to reason about it. Moreover, the verification problem may be reduced to possibly simpler verification tasks. Due to the complexity of reactive systems, these features are essential. In recent years there has been a growing interest in this topic starting from the work of [14] and various approaches have emerged both for temporal logics and for calculus. In particular, there have been many proposals about compositional reasoning for calculus within the framework of CCS like languages [13, 61, 90, 91, 10, 12] The basic idea is to exploit the algebraic structure of ....

....with synchronous communication via channels is considered. A compositional proof system for checking formulas of linear temporal logic extended with bounded operators as well as with explicit reference to time is proposed. The starting point of this approach is the composition method proposed by [14] for linear temporal logic. In [19] timed transition modules are used for modelling real time systems. This model is an extension of timed transition systems that permits to explicitely model the interaction with the environment. The paper presents a compositional proof system for linear temporal ....

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proc. 16th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63, 1984.

....values, a so called time diagram. Interpreting time instances as possible interleaving points and introducing boolean variables (so called action variables) which indicate for each time instance whether the given process is active or not (these action variables are also used for the same purpose in[2]) we can describe logically the compositional semantics of [3, 4] in terms of time diagrams. Thus we show in this paper that a compositional pre post style reasoning about shared variable concurrency, apart from the given underlying data structures, involves reasoning about a discrete total ....

.... logic is, for example, that it allows for a straightforward axiomatizion of sequential composition, whereas in temporal logic compositional reasoning about the sequential composition operator requires the introduction of the chop operator which complicates the underlying logic considerably ([2]) Moreover explicit first order quantification over time also allows for a simple logical formulation of abstraction from finite stuttering and granularity of interleaving as described in [3, 4] These abstractions are formulated in terms of the rules of the proof system. Consequently the ....

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In 16th ACM symposium on Theory of Computation, pages 51--63, 1984.

....systems where from some input, without further interaction, output is produced. Because of this characteristic reactive systems are described as sets of behaviours (histories) Here we present a framework which can model both CSP based and shared variable based concurrency, using the work of [Sta84, BKP84, BKP86, DK90, KMP93]. In section 2 reactive systems are specified by sets of histories together with a basis. The latter provides syntactic information about the channels and variables of the specified system. A history is pair consisting of an event and a state function. The domains of these functions are the ....

....two approaches are unified in [CC96] These unification ideas are used here, i.e. we use an event variable to store compositionality information like this is a system step or this is an environment step or this is a communication step . The use of event variable is inspired by the work of [BKP84]. This enables us to describe parallel composition of reactive systems by conjunction. Note that in for instance Lamport s work on TLA [Lam94] this is not always the case: x : 1kx : 1 must be modelled as disjunction because conjunction leads to a one process specification x : 1. In our model ....

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proceedings of 16th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63, 1984.

....i.e. modifications of the shared variables by the environment of P . As proposed by Aczel [5] it su#ces to extend the set of transitions by allowing arbitrary environment transitions. These new transitions, that we label with e, are defined in Table 3; a similar construction can be found in [6, 23, 26, 27, 30]. Table 3: State based concurrency: extended semantics # (P, s) e # # (P, s # ) where s # #X = s#X In order to meet the requirements (1) and (2) we follow [7] and extend this construction to message based concurrency: successive transitions of P can be interleaved with arbitrary ....

Barringer, H., Kuiper, R., Pnueli, A.: Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In: Proc. 16th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 51-63 1984

....systems where from some input, without further interaction, output is produced. Because of this characteristic reactive systems are described as sets of behaviours (histories) Here we present a framework which can model both CSP based and shared variable based concurrency, using the work of [Sta84, BKP84, BKP86, DK90, KMP93]. We will use a basis to provide syntactic information about the channels and variables of the specified system. A history is a Correspondence and offprint requests to: Antonio Cau, Software Technology Research Laboratory, Science and Engineering Research Centre, De Montfort University, The ....

....two approaches are unified in [CC96] These unification ideas are used here, i.e. we use an event variable to store compositionality information like this is a system step or this is an environment step or this is a communication step . The use of event variable is inspired by the work of [BKP84]. This enables us to describe parallel composition of reactive systems by conjunction. Note that in for instance Lamport s work on TLA [Lam94, AL93] this is not always the case: x : 1kx : 1 must be modelled as disjunction because conjunction leads to a one process specification x : 1. In our ....

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you May Compose Temporal Logic Specifications. In Proceedings of 16th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63, 1984.

....of the resource) occurs only under the control of the arbiter. This distinction between internal and external events is extremely important if reasoning about the system is to be decomposed into reasoning about system components in isolation, as was recognized by Barringer, Kuiper, and Pnueli in [BKP84]. Furthermore, it is clear that satisfaction of liveness conditions such as the no lockout condition requires that the arbiter be given fair turns to produce output, rather than simply being overwhelmed by a flood of input. The ability to express this notion of fair turns depends heavily on ....

....if whenever the execution passes through a state of S, eventually either the execution passes through a state of T or an action from Pi is performed. 1 More formally, e satisfies the condition S , T; Pi) if, whenever a i 2 S, 1 This condition may also be expressed in the temporal logic of [BKP84]. either a j 2 T for some j i or j 2 Pi for some j i. As a notational convenience, we will denote the condition S , T; Pi) by S , Pi when the set T is empty. Notice, however, that the fair executions of an automaton A are precisely those executions satisfying the conditions states(A) ....

Howard Barringer, Ruurd Kuiper, and Amir Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63. ACM, April 1984.

....Even the Generalized Hoare Logic described in [4] and [9] which looks compositional, actually assumes a context of a complete program. The only attempt we know of at a truly compositional axiomatic semantics for concurrent programs that handles both safety and liveness properties is given in [14]. However, while it is axiomatic in a strict logical sense, that approach is not in the spirit of the axiomatic school because it essentially defines a new temporal logic operator for every programming language construct. In this paper, I present a new compositional, truly axiomatic semantics for ....

.... in the spring of 1984 [10] The fifth idea has been present in all of my work on temporal logic, starting with [5] I was originally led to it by my philosophical objections to the next time operator; only later did I recognize its practical significance [8] The first two ideas were used in [14], but they are not enough to permit a compositional semantics based upon a simple temporal logic. Combined with the third idea, they do permit a compositional semantics, but a semantics that I did not find satisfying. It seemed like a large, complicated structure had to be erected solely to reason ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper. and A. Pnueli. Now You May Compose Temporal Logic Specifications. Sixteenth ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, (May, 1984).

....this version misprints and inaccuracies in the Introduction and section 2 have been corrected. Supported by NSF Grant No. 9002826 CCR INTRODUCTION Over the last decade much attention was devoted to compositional methods for specification and verification of concurrent systems (See for example [BKP], dR] AL] MP2] This approach seems to offer a convenient alternative to the global one, in which only the complete system is available to specification and analysis. In particular, starting with [MC] different compositional proof techniques were investigated for networks of processes which ....

Barringer H., Kuiper R., Pnueli A. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications, In Proceedings of 16th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 51-63, 1984.

....obligation on actions is not compositional. i.e. there is no general definition that can be used for compound actions and that can be decomposed into obligations on the basic actions. That compositionality of operators on actions is a difficult problem in a dense time framework can also be seen in [2]. This problem is caused by the differing durations of the actions within the compound action. A solution might be to introduce an extra operator After(ff)OE which would be the equivalent to the dynamic logic operator [ff]OE. This operator can be used (as is done in dynamic logic) to isolate the ....

Barringer,H., Kuiper,R. and Pnueli,A. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications, Proc. 16th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (1984),51-63.

No context found.

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Washington D. C., April, 1984. 106

No context found.

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper. and A. Pnueli. Now You May Compose Temporal Logic Specifications. Sixteenth ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, (May, 1984).

No context found.

Howard Barringer, Ruurd Kuiper, and Amir Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In Sixteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63. ACM, April 1984.

No context found.

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Nowyou may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proc. Sixteenth ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63, 1984.

No context found.

Barringer, H., R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. Proceedings 16th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (Washington, D.C., April 1984), 51-63.

No context found.

H. Barringer, H. Kuiper, and R. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proc. 16th ACM Symp. on Theory Comput., pages 51--63, 1984.

No context found.

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper, and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In 16th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pages 51--63. ACM Press, 1984.

No context found.

Barringer, H., Kuiper, R., and Pnueli, A. Nowyou may compose temporal logic specifications. In Proc. of the Sixteenth ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing (1984), pp. 51--63.

No context found.

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper & A. Pnueli (1984): Now you may compose temporal logic specifications. In ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC '84), ACM Press, Baltimore, USA, pp. 51--63.

No context found.

H. Barringer, R. Kuiper and A. Pnueli. Now you may compose Temporal Logic Specifications, Symposium on Theory of Computing, 1984

No context found.

Barringer, H., Kuiper, R., and Pnueli, A., Now You May Compose Temporal Logic Specifications, STOC84.

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