Skip to main content

Stronger validity criteria for encoding synchrony

Authors

Rob van Glabbeek, Ursula Goltz, Christopher Lippert and Mennicke Stephan

DATA61

Technical University of Braunschweig

UNSW Sydney

Abstract

We analyse two translations from the synchronous into the asynchronous π-calculus, both without choice, that are often quoted as standard examples of valid encodings, showing that the asynchronous π-calculus is just as expressive as the synchronous one. We examine which of the quality criteria for encodings from the literature support the validity of these translations. Moreover, we prove their validity according to much stronger criteria than considered previously in the literature.

BibTeX Entry

  @inproceedings{vanGlabbeek_GLS_19,
    author           = {van Glabbeek, Rob and Goltz, Ursula and Lippert, Christopher and Stephan, Mennicke},
    doi              = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31175-9\_11},
    editor           = {{M.S. Alvim, K. Chatzikokolakis, C. Olarte \& F. Valencia}},
    month            = nov,
    date             = {2019-11-4},
    year             = {2019},
    keywords         = {Process calculi; expressiveness; translations; quality criteria for encodings; valid encodings;
                        compositionality; operational correspondence; semantic equivalences; asynchronous π-calculus.},
    title            = {Stronger Validity Criteria for Encoding Synchrony},
    series           = {LNCS 11760},
    address          = {Paris},
    pages            = {182-205},
    volume           = {11760},
    booktitle        = {The Art of Modelling Computational Systems: A Journey from Logic and Concurrency to Security and
                        Privacy --- Essays Dedicated to Catuscia Palamidessi on the Occasion of Her 60th Birthday},
    publisher        = {Springer}
  }

Download

Served by Apache on Linux on seL4.