|
ABSTRACT
A simple model, AT, for nondeterministic machines is presented which is based on certain types of trees. A set of operations, &Sgr;, is defined over AT and it is shown to be completely characterized by a set of inequations over &Sgr;. AT is used to define the denotational semantics of a language for defining nondeterministic machines. The significance of the model is demonstrated by showing that this semantics reflects an intuitive operational semantics of machines based on the idea that machines should only be differentiated if there is some experiment that differentiates between them.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
| |
1
|
BERGSTRA, J.A., AND KLOP, J.W.fixed point semantics in process algebras. Tech. Rep. iW 206/82, Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1982.
|
| |
2
|
BERGSTRA, J.A., AND KLOP, J.W.Process algebra for communication and mutual exclusion. Tech. Rep. IW 218/83, Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1983.
|
| |
3
|
BROOKES, S.D. A model for communicating sequential processes. Ph.D. dissertation. Oxford Univ., Oxford, England, 1983.
|
| |
4
|
|
 |
5
|
|
| |
6
|
DE BAKKER, J.W., AND ZUCKER, J. i.Processes and the denotational semantics of concurrency. Tech. Rep. IW 209/82, Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1982.
|
| |
7
|
|
| |
8
|
DE NICOLA, R., AND HENNESSY, M.Testing equivalences for processes. Theor. Comput. Sci. 34, 1, 2 (1984), 83-135.
|
 |
9
|
|
 |
10
|
|
| |
11
|
|
| |
12
|
|
| |
13
|
|
| |
14
|
HENNESSY, M.A term model for synchronous process. Inf. Control 51, 1 (Oct. 1981), 58-75.
|
| |
15
|
|
 |
16
|
|
| |
17
|
|
 |
18
|
|
| |
19
|
HOARE, C.A.R A model for communicating sequential processes. Tech. Monograph Prg.-22. Comput. Lab., Univ. of Oxford, Oxford, England, 1981.
|
| |
20
|
|
| |
21
|
HOWlE, J.An Introduction to Semigroup Theory. Academic Press, Orlando, Fla., 1976.
|
| |
22
|
KENNAWAY, J. K.Formal semantics of nondeterminism and parallelism, Ph.D. dissertation. Univ. of Oxford, Oxford, England, 1981.
|
| |
23
|
|
| |
24
|
|
| |
25
|
MILNER, R.On relating synchrony and asynchrony, Tech. Rep. CSR-75-80, Univ. of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1980.
|
| |
26
|
MILNER, R.Calculi for synchrony and asynchrony. Theor. Comput. Sci. 25, (1983), 267-310.
|
| |
27
|
|
| |
28
|
PLOTKIN, G.A structural approach to operational semantics, Lecture Notes. Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, 1981.
|
| |
29
|
ROUNDS, W.C., AND BROOKES, S.D.possible futures, acceptances, refusals, and communicating processes. In Proceedings of the 22nd Foundations of Computer Science Annual Symposium (Nashville, Tenn., Oct.). IEEE, New York, 1981.
|
 |
30
|
|
| |
31
|
SCOTT, D.Data types as lattices. SIAM J. Comput. 5 (1976), 522-587.
|
| |
32
|
STIRLING, C.A proof theoretic characterisation of observational equivalence, Tech. Rep. CSR- 132-83. Univ. of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, 1983; Theor. Comput. Sci., to be published.
|
| |
33
|
STIRLING, C.Unpublished manuscript.
|
| |
34
|
|
| |
35
|
WINSKEL, G.On powerdomains and modality. Theor. Comput. Sci. 36 (1985), 127-137.
|
REVIEW
"Ernst L. Leiss : Reviewer"
The starting point for this paper is the observation that equivalent machines
(i.e., machines accepting the same set of words in the usual
language-theoretical sense) may have quite different behaviors. More
specifically, in observing the behavi
more...
|