14.08.2013 Views

Reactive Systems: Modelling, Specification and Verification - Cs.ioc.ee

Reactive Systems: Modelling, Specification and Verification - Cs.ioc.ee

Reactive Systems: Modelling, Specification and Verification - Cs.ioc.ee

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

28 CHAPTER 2. THE LANGUAGE CCS<br />

we have so far developed. However, intuition alone can lead us to wrong conclusions,<br />

<strong>and</strong> most importantly cannot be fed to a computer! To capture formally<br />

our underst<strong>and</strong>ing of the semantics of the language CCS, we therefore introduce<br />

the collection of SOS rules in Table 2.2. These rules are used to generate an LTS<br />

whose states are CCS expressions. In that LTS, a transition P α → Q holds for CCS<br />

expressions P, Q <strong>and</strong> action α if, <strong>and</strong> only if, it can be proven using the rules in<br />

Table 2.2.<br />

A rule like<br />

α.P α → P<br />

is an axiom, as it has no premises—that is, it has no transition above the solid<br />

line. This means that proving that a process of the form α.P affords the transition<br />

α.P α → P (the conclusion of the rule) can be done without establishing any further<br />

sub-goal. Therefore each process of the form α.P affords the transition α.P α → P .<br />

As an example, we have that the following transition<br />

pub.CS1<br />

pub<br />

→ CS1<br />

is provable using the above rule for action prefixing.<br />

On the other h<strong>and</strong>, a rule like<br />

P α → P ′<br />

K α → P ′<br />

def<br />

K = P<br />

(2.7)<br />

has a non-empty set of premises. This rule says that to establish that constant K<br />

affords the transition mentioned in the conclusion of the rule, we have to prove<br />

first that the body of the defining equation for K, namely the process P , affords<br />

the transition P α → P ′ . Using this rule, pattern matching <strong>and</strong> transition (2.7), we<br />

can prove the transition<br />

CS pub<br />

→ CS1 ,<br />

which we had informally derived before for the version of process CS given in<br />

Table 2.1 on page 18.<br />

The aforementioned rule for constants has a side condition, namely K def<br />

= P ,<br />

that describes a constraint that must be met in order for the rule to be applicable. In<br />

that specific example, the side condition states intuitively that the rule may be used<br />

to derive an initial transition for constant K if ‘K is declared to have body P ’.<br />

Another example of a rule with a side condition is that for restriction.<br />

P α → P ′<br />

P \ L α → P ′ \ L<br />

α, ¯α ∈ L

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!