ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
“Sometimes” and “not never” revisited: on branching versus linear time temporal logic
Full text PdfPdf (2.07 MB)
Source Journal of the ACM (JACM) archive
Volume 33 ,  Issue 1  (January 1986) table of contents
The MIT Press scientific computation series
Pages: 151 - 178  
Year of Publication: 1986
ISSN:0004-5411
Authors
E. Allen Emerson  Univ. of Texas, Austin
Joseph Y. Halpern  IBM Research Laboratory, San Jose, CA
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 18,   Downloads (12 Months): 156,   Citation Count: 89
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   review   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/4904.4999
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

The differences between and appropriateness of branching versus linear time temporal logic for reasoning about concurrent programs are studied. These issues have been previously considered by Lamport. To facilitate a careful examination of these issues, a language, CTL*, in which a universal or existential path quantifier can prefix an arbitrary linear time assertion, is defined. The expressive power of a number of sublanguages is then compared. CTL* is also related to the logics MPL of Abrahamson and PL of Harel, Kozen, and Parikh. The paper concludes with a comparison of the utility of branching and linear time temporal logics.


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
2
 
3
4
 
5
EMERSON, E. A. Alternative semantics for temporal logics. Theor. Comput. Sci. 26 (1983), 121-130.
 
6
 
7
 
8
EMERSON, E. A., AND CLARKE, E.M. Using branching time logic to synthesize synchronization skeletons. Sci. Comput. Prog. 2 (1982), 241-266.
9
 
10
11
 
12
EMERSON, E. A., AND SIS'rLA, A.P. Deciding full branching time logic. Inf. Control 61, 3 (1984), 175-201.
 
13
FISCHER, M. J., AND LADNER, R.E. Propositional dynamic logic of regular programs. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 18 (1979), 194-211.
14
 
15
HAILPERN, B., AND OWICKI, S. Modular verification of concurrent programs using temporal logic. Tech. Rep., Stanford Univ. Stanford, Calif., 1981.
 
16
HAREL, D., KOZEN, D., AND PARXK,, R. Process logic: Expressiveness, decidability, and completeness. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 25 (1982), 144-170.
 
17
HAREL, D., AND SHERMAN, R. Looping vs. repeating in dynamic logic. Inf. Control 55 (1982), 175-192.
 
18
KAMP, H. Tense logic and the theory of linear order. Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA, Los Angeles, 1968.
19
 
20
LEHMANN, D., AND SHELAH, S. Reasoning with time and chance. Inf. Control 53 (1982), 165-198.
 
21
22
23
 
24
PNUELI, A. The temporal logic of programs. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, New York, 1977, pp. 46-57.
 
25
PNUELI, A. The temporal semantics of concurrent programs. Theor. Comput. Sci. 13 ( 198 l), 45- 60.
26
 
27
PRIOR, A. Time and Modality. Oxford Univ. Press, London, 1957.
 
28
PRIOR, A. Past, Present, and Future. Oxford Univ. Press, London, 1967.
 
29
RESCHER, N., AND URQUHART, A. Temporal logic. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 197 I.
30
31
 
32
33
 
34
WOLPER, P. Temporal logic can be more expressive. Inf. Control 56, 1/2 (1983), 72-99.

CITED BY  89


REVIEW

"Ali Mili : Reviewer"

This paper extends earlier work by Lamport [1] on comparing two logics of concurrent programming: Branching Temporal Logic and Linear Time Temporal Logic. In order to carry out the comparisons, the paper introduces a special-purpose temporal not  more...

Collaborative Colleagues:
E. Allen Emerson: colleagues
Joseph Y. Halpern: colleagues