R. Nagarajan. Typed Concurrent Programs: Specification & Verification. PhD thesis, University of London, 1996. To appear. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
A Specification Structure for Deadlock-Freedom of.. - Abramsky, Gay, al. (1998) (1 citation) (Correct)
....the theory, by applying the sets of processes approach to the asynchronous interaction category ASProc [6] The result is a category of deadlock free processes in which the global synchrony condition is not present. Preliminary versions of this work have appeared in [2,23] and improved versions in [9,39]; a full report of this area will be the subject of a future paper. Beyond the issues of synchrony and a formal syntax, there are two respects in which our theory of deadlock freedom is restrictive. First, we have not yet addressed the issue of mobility [37,38] which has featured prominently in ....
R. Nagarajan. Typed Concurrent Programs: Specification & Verification. PhD thesis, University of London, 1997. To appear.
A Type-theoretic Approach to Deadlock-freedom of.. - Abramsky, Gay, Nagarajan (1997) (6 citations) Self-citation (Nagarajan) (Correct)
.... used will be prefixing, non deterministic sum and guarded recursion, with their usual interpretations in terms of labelled transition systems [18] A formal calculus of typed asynchronous processes (with a weaker type system which does not guarantee deadlock freedom) has been developed [19], and this calculus will eventually be combined with ideas of the present paper, but for now we will concentrate on the semantic aspects of the type system for deadlock freedom. A significant difference between our notation and that of CCS is that we do not need complementary actions such as a ....
....correctness, namely deadlock freedom. The types do not express the specification that the sequence of delivered messages is the same as the sequence of received messages. This specification could be expressed in our typed framework, and we have analysed similar specifications of other systems [1, 10, 19], but it is not the purpose of the present paper to illustrate this aspect of the theory. 13 5.2 Types in ASProc V In order to type the system at the most elementary level, without taking account of deadlock freedom, we need the following ASProc V types. In each case, the safety specification ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
R. Nagarajan. Typed Concurrent Programs: Specification & Verification. PhD thesis, University of London, 1996. To appear.
A Type-theoretic Approach to Deadlock-freedom of.. - Samson Abramsky Simon (1997) (6 citations) Self-citation (Nagarajan) (Correct)
.... used will be prefixing, non deterministic sum and guarded recursion, with their usual interpretations in terms of labelled transition systems [18] A formal calculus of typed asynchronous processes (with a weaker type system which does not guarantee deadlock freedom) has been developed [19], and this calculus will eventually be combined with ideas of the present paper, but for now we will concentrate on the semantic aspects of the type system for deadlock freedom. A significant difference between our notation and that of CCS is that we do not need complementary actions such as a ....
....correctness, namely deadlock freedom. The types do not express the specification that the sequence of delivered messages is the same as the sequence of received messages. This specification could be expressed in our typed framework, and we have analysed similar specifications of other systems [1, 10, 19], but it is not the purpose of the present paper to illustrate this aspect of the theory. 13 5.2 Types in ASProc V In order to type the system at the most elementary level, without taking account of deadlock freedom, we need the following ASProc V types. In each case, the safety specification ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
R. Nagarajan. Typed Concurrent Programs: Specification & Verification. PhD thesis, University of London, 1996. To appear.
A Type-theoretic Approach to Deadlock-freedom of Asynchronous .. - Samson Abramsky (1997) (6 citations) Self-citation (Nagarajan) (Correct)
.... systems correspond to the structure of various interaction categories: the synchronous category SProc whose types are safety specifications [12] the synchronous category SProc D whose types specify deadlock freedom [6] and the asynchronous category ASProc whose types are safety specifications [20]. Future work will combine the ideas of these calculi into a syntax to accompany the semantic type system of the present paper. Much of our previous work has concentrated on deadlock freedom of synchronous systems [1, 11] In the asynchronous case, the theory is complicated by the need to consider ....
.... used will be prefixing, non deterministic sum and guarded recursion, with their usual interpretations in terms of labelled transition systems [19] A formal calculus of typed asynchronous processes (with a weaker type system which does not guarantee deadlock freedom) has been developed [20], and this calculus will eventually be combined with the ideas of the present paper, but for now we will concentrate on the semantic aspects of the type system for deadlock freedom. A significant difference between our notation and that of CCS is that we do not need complementary actions such as a ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
R. Nagarajan. Typed Concurrent Programs: Specification & Verification. PhD thesis, University of London, 1997. To appear.
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