Bhat, G., Cleaveland, R., and Lttgen, G., 97. "Dynamic priorities for modeling real-time," in Proc. of the Formal Description Techniques and Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification (FORTE X/PSTV XVII '97), Osaka, November 1997, pp. 321-336. T. Mizuno, N. Shiratori, T. Higashino, and A. Togashi, Eds.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....Phillips performs a study and comparison between various approaches to 14 introducing priority in process algebra. Relative vs. absolute and conditional vs. exclusive forms of priority appear in the literature. Recently, dynamic priority has also been proposed in the context of real time systems [4]. In our approach, priority is not used as a modelling operator. Rather, it is simply used as a way of eliminating transitions, and obtaining system executions that would otherwise be considered unfair. Therefore, we do not need to consider whether the semantic equivalence of our model remains a ....

Bhat, G., Cleaveland, R., and Lttgen, G., 97. "Dynamic priorities for modeling real-time," in Proc. of the Formal Description Techniques and Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification (FORTE X/PSTV XVII '97), Osaka, November 1997, pp. 321-336. T. Mizuno, N. Shiratori, T. Higashino, and A. Togashi, Eds.

....(priorities are enforced by the scheduling algorithm and most real time operating systems support at least 256 different priority levels) Modelling priorities is desirable, as it would allow process algebras to be used in the area of safetycritical, real time systems. Moreover, recent work [BCL97] demonstrates that priorities can be an effective way of cutting down state explosion in model checking verification. At present, E Lotos has no concept of priorities, although the introduction of priorities was a goal of the Committee initially. As regards Lotos NT, based on [BCL97, CLN97] we ....

....recent work [BCL97] demonstrates that priorities can be an effective way of cutting down state explosion in model checking verification. At present, E Lotos has no concept of priorities, although the introduction of priorities was a goal of the Committee initially. As regards Lotos NT, based on [BCL97, CLN97] we propose to attach priorities to internal actions (using the hide operator to specify priorities) in such a way that prioritized actions can preempt other actions. There are two other important issues for which we seek a better solution than E Lotos: H. Garavel, M. Sighireanu ffl ....

G. Bhat, R. Cleaveland, and G. Luttgen. Dynamic Priorities for Modeling RealTime. In Proceedings of the 17th Joint Conference on Formal Description Techniques and Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification (FORTE X/PSTV XVII '97), Osaka, Japan, pages 321--336. Chapman and Hall, November 1997.

....Phillips performs a study and comparison between various approaches to introducing priority in process algebra. Relative vs. absolute and conditional vs. exclusive forms of priority appear in the literature. Recently, dynamic priority has also been proposed in the context of real time systems [4]. In our approach, priority is not used as a modelling operator. Rather, it is simply used as a way of eliminating transitions, and obtaining system executions that would otherwise be considered unfair. Therefore, we do not need to consider whether the semantic equivalence of our model remains a ....

Bhat, G., Cleaveland, R., and Lttgen, G. "Dynamic priorities for modeling real-time," in Proc. of the Formal Description Techniques and Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification (FORTE X/PSTV XVII '97), Osaka, November 1997, pp. 321-336. T. Mizuno, N. Shiratori, T. Higashino, and A. Togashi, Eds.

....Phillips performs a study and comparison between various approaches to introducing priority in process algebra. Relative vs. absolute and conditional vs. exclusive forms of priority appear in the literature. Recently, dynamic priority has also been proposed in the context of real time systems [35]. In our approach, priority is not used as a modelling operator. Rather, it is simply used as a way of eliminating transitions, and obtaining system executions that would otherwise be considered unfair. Therefore, we do not need to consider whether the semantic equivalence of our model remains a ....

Bhat, G., Cleaveland, R., and Lttgen, G. "Dynamic priorities for modeling real-time", in Proc. of the Formal Description Techniques and Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification (FORTE X/PSTV XVII '97). November 1997, Osaka. Chapman and Hall, pp. 321-336. T. Mizuno, et al., Eds.

....language, and automatically check the formalized properties by using the local model checker #Bhat Cleaveland 1996# integrated in the CWB NC. Due to space constraints all proofs and part of the formalization of the SCSI 2 case study are left out and can be found in a technical report #Bhat et al. 1997#. Process algebraic framework 3 2 PROCESS ALGEBRAIC FRAMEWORK In this section weintroduce the process algebra CCS rt and develop the new process algebra CCS dp , which has the same syntax but di#erent semantics. Whereas CCS rt is an extension of CCS #Milner 1989# in order to capture ....

....rules implement pre emption. Finally, C def = P denotes a constant de#nition, i.e. C is a recursively de#ned process that is a distinguished solution of the equation C = P . For our framework we obtain the following important results, which are formally stated and proved in a technical report #Bhat et al. 1997#. Given an arbitrary process in our language there exists a one to one semantic correspondence between the associated transition systems according to CCS rt and to CCS dp semantics. Moreover, the standard strong bisimulations #Milner 1989#, which can be de#ned straightforwardly for CCS rt ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Bhat, G., Cleaveland, R. & L#uttgen, G. #1997#, Dynamic priorities for modeling real-time, Technical report, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA. To appear.

....language, and automatically check the formalized properties by using the local model checker (Bhat Cleaveland 1996) integrated in the CWB NC. Due to space constraints all proofs and part of the formalization of the SCSI 2 case study are left out and can be found in a technical report (Bhat et al. 1997). Process algebraic framework 3 2 PROCESS ALGEBRAIC FRAMEWORK In this section we introduce the process algebra CCS rt and develop the new process algebra CCS dp , which has the same syntax but different semantics. Whereas CCS rt is an extension of CCS (Milner 1989) in order to capture ....

....rules implement pre emption. Finally, C def = P denotes a constant definition, i.e. C is a recursively defined process that is a distinguished solution of the equation C = P . For our framework we obtain the following important results, which are formally stated and proved in a technical report (Bhat et al. 1997). Given an arbitrary process in our language there exists a one to one semantic correspondence between the associated transition systems according to CCS rt and to CCS dp semantics. Moreover, the standard strong bisimulations (Milner 1989) which can be defined straightforwardly for CCS rt ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Bhat, G., Cleaveland, R. & Luttgen, G. (1997), Dynamic priorities for modeling real-time, Technical report, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA. 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