Abstract
Compositional Reasoning – reducing reasoning about a concurrent system to reasoning about its individual components – is an essential tool for managing proof complexity and state explosion in model checking. Typically, such reasoning is carried out in an assume-guarantee manner: each component guarantees its behavior based on assumptions about the behavior of other components. Restrictions imposed on such methods to avoid unsoundness usually also result in incompleteness – i.e., one is unable to prove certain properties. In this paper, we construct an abstract framework for reasoning about process composition, formulate an assume-guarantee method, and show that it is sound and semantically complete. We then show how to instantiate the framework for several common notions of process behavior and composition. For these notions, the instantiations result in the first methods known to be complete for mutually inductive, assume-guarantee reasoning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abadi, M., Lamport, L.: The existence of refinement mappings. In: LICS (1988)
Abadi, M., Lamport, L.: Conjoining specifications. In: ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS) (May 1995)
Abadi, M., Merz, S.: An abstract account of composition. In: Hájek, P., Wiedermann, J. (eds.) MFCS 1995. LNCS, vol. 969. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)
Abadi, M., Plotkin, G.: A logical view of composition and refinement. In: POPL (1991)
Alpern, B., Schneider, F.: Defining liveness. Information Processing Letters 21(4) (1985)
Alur, R., Henzinger, T.: Reactive modules. In: LICS (1996)
Amla, N., Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K.S., Trefler, R.J.: Assume-guarantee based compositional reasoning for synchronous timing diagrams. In: Margaria, T., Yi, W. (eds.) TACAS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2031, p. 465. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Amla, N., Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K.S., Trefler, R.J.: Visual specifications for modular reasoning about asynchronous systems. In: Peled, D.A., Vardi, M.Y. (eds.) FORTE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2529. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Chandy, K.M., Misra, J.: Proofs of networks of processes. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 7(4) (1981)
Clarke, E.M., Emerson, E.A.: Design and synthesis of synchronization skeletons using branching time temporal logic. In: Workshop on Logics of Programs. LNCS, vol. 131 (1981)
de Roever, W.-P., de Boer, F., Hannemann, U., Hooman, J., Lakhnech, Y., Poel, M., Zwiers, J.: Concurrency Verification: Introduction to Compositional and Noncompositional Proof Methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)
de Roever, W.-P., Langmaack, H., Pnueli, A. (eds.): COMPOS 1997. LNCS, vol. 1536. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Dijkstra, E.W., Scholten, C.S.: Predicate Calculus and Program Semantics. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)
Henzinger, T.A., Kupferman, O., Rajamani, S.: Fair simulation. In: Mazurkiewicz, A., Winkowski, J. (eds.) CONCUR 1997. LNCS, vol. 1243. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Henzinger, T.A., Qadeer, S., Rajamani, S.K., Tasiran, S.: An assume-guarantee rule for checking simulation. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS) (January 2002)
Jones, C.B.: Development methods for computer programs including a notion of interference. PhD thesis, Oxford University (1981)
Kurshan, R.P.: Computer-Aided Verification of Coordinating Processes: The Automata-Theoretic Approach. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1994)
Maier, P.: A set-theoretic framework for assume-guarantee reasoning. In: Orejas, F., Spirakis, P.G., van Leeuwen, J. (eds.) ICALP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2076, p. 821. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Maier, P.: Compositional circular assume-guarantee rules cannot be sound and complete. In: Gordon, A.D. (ed.) FOSSACS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2620, pp. 343–357. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Manolios, P., Trefler, R.J.: Safety and liveness in branching time. In: LICS (2001)
McMillan, K.L.: Circular compositional reasoning about liveness. In: Pierre, L., Kropf, T. (eds.) CHARME 1999. LNCS, vol. 1703, pp. 342–346. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)
Milner, R.: An algebraic definition of simulation between programs. In: 2nd IJCAI (1971)
Namjoshi, K.S., Trefler, R.J.: On the completeness of compositional reasoning. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Pandya, P., Joseph, M.: P-A logic - a compositional proof system for distributed programs. Distributed Computing (1991)
Queille, J.P., Sifakis, J.: Specification and verification of concurrent systems in CESAR. In: Dezani-Ciancaglini, M., Montanari, U. (eds.) Programming 1982. LNCS, vol. 137. Springer, Heidelberg (1982)
Viswanathan, M., Viswanathan, R.: Foundations for circular compositional reasoning. In: Orejas, F., Spirakis, P.G., van Leeuwen, J. (eds.) ICALP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2076, p. 835. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Amla, N., Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K., Trefler, R. (2003). Abstract Patterns of Compositional Reasoning. In: Amadio, R., Lugiez, D. (eds) CONCUR 2003 - Concurrency Theory. CONCUR 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2761. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45187-7_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45187-7_28
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40753-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45187-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive