Dynamic consistency in process algebra: From Paradigm to ACP

The coordination modelling language Paradigm addresses collaboration between components in terms of dynamic constraints. Within a Paradigm model, component dynamics are consistently specified at various levels of abstraction. To enable automated verification of Paradigm models, a translation of Paradigm into process algebra is provided. Examples are given and guidelines for a systematic translation into the process algebra ACP are discussed. Verification results building on the mCRL2 toolset are presented as well.

[1]  Robin Milner,et al.  Operational and Algebraic Semantics of Concurrent Processes , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics.

[2]  Luís Soares Barbosa,et al.  An Orchestrator for Dynamic Interconnection of Software Components , 2007, CoOrg/MTCoord@COORDINATION.

[3]  Rocco De Nicola,et al.  Three logics for branching bisimulation , 1995, JACM.

[4]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  Consistency-Preserving Model Evolution through Transformations , 2002, UML.

[5]  Grzegorz Rozenberg,et al.  Team automata for spatial access control , 2001, ECSCW.

[6]  Manfred Broy,et al.  Specification and development of interactive systems: focus on streams, interfaces, and refinement , 2001 .

[7]  Ernst-Rüdiger Olderog,et al.  Integrating a formal method into a software engineering process with UML and Java , 2008, Formal Aspects of Computing.

[8]  Jos C. M. Baeten,et al.  Process Algebra: Equational Theories of Communicating Processes , 2009 .

[9]  David Garlan,et al.  A formal basis for architectural connection , 1997, TSEM.

[10]  Frank S. de Boer,et al.  Modeling and Verification of Reactive Systems using Rebeca , 2004, Fundam. Informaticae.

[11]  Colin Stirling,et al.  Modal Mu-Calculi , 2001 .

[12]  Luís Soares Barbosa,et al.  Architectural Prototyping: From CCS to .Net , 2005, SBMF.

[13]  Erik P. de Vink,et al.  Paradigm as Organization-Oriented Coordination Language , 2006, CoOrg@COORDINATION.

[14]  Maarten van Steen,et al.  Parallel Control Processes: Modular Parallelism and Communication , 1986, Annual Meeting of the IEEE Industry Applications Society.

[15]  Erik P. de Vink,et al.  Data-aware design and verification of service compositions with Reo and mCRL2 , 2010, SAC '10.

[16]  Nicholas Carriero,et al.  Linda in context , 1989, CACM.

[17]  Carlos Canal,et al.  TITAN: a Framework for Aspect Oriented System Evolution , 2007, International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA 2007).

[18]  Andrew William Roscoe,et al.  The Theory and Practice of Concurrency , 1997 .

[19]  Erik P. de Vink,et al.  Delegation Modeling with Paradigm , 2005, COORDINATION.

[20]  Paolo Ciancarini,et al.  Coordination models and languages as software integrators , 1996, CSUR.

[21]  Jan Friso Groote,et al.  The Formal Specification Language mCRL2 , 2006, MMOSS.

[22]  R. V. Glabbeek.  The Linear Time-Branching Time Spectrum I The Semantics of Concrete , Sequential ProcessesR , 2007 .

[23]  Farhad Arbab,et al.  The IWIM Model for Coordination of Concurrent Activities , 1996, COORDINATION.

[24]  Erik P. de Vink,et al.  Operational Semantics for Coordination in Paradigm , 2002, COORDINATION.

[25]  David Garlan,et al.  A Formal Approach to Software Architectures , 1992, IFIP Congress.

[26]  Manfred Broy,et al.  A formal model of services , 2007, TSEM.

[27]  Andries Wouter Stam.  Interaction protocols in paradigm : extensions to a modeling language through tool development , 2009 .

[28]  R. V. Glabbeek.  The Linear Time - Branching Time Spectrum II: The Semantics of Sequential Systems with Silent Moves , 1993 .

[29]  J. Bergstra,et al.  Handbook of Process Algebra , 2001 .

[30]  Jochen Malte Küster,et al.  Consistency management of object oriented behavioral models , 2004 .

[31]  Wan Fokkink,et al.  Introduction to Process Algebra , 1999, Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series.

[32]  J. C. M. Baeten,et al.  Process Algebra: Bibliography , 1990 .

[33]  Farhad Arbab,et al.  Reo: A Channel-based Coordination Model for Component Composition , 2005 .

[34]  Erik P. de Vink,et al.  Dynamic System Adaptation by Constraint Orchestration , 2008, ArXiv.

[35]  Jan Friso Groote,et al.  Algebraic Process Verification , 2001, Handbook of Process Algebra.

[36]  Suzana Andova,et al.  System evolution by migration coordination , 2008 .

[37]  Erik P. de Vink,et al.  Evolution On-the-Fly with Paradigm , 2006, COORDINATION.

[38]  Gregor Engels,et al.  SOCCA: Specifications of Coordinated and Cooperative Activities , 1994 .

[39]  Erik P. de Vink,et al.  Formalizing Adaptation On-the-Fly , 2009, FOCLASA.

[40]  Carlos Canal,et al.  A Safe Dynamic Adaptation Framework for Aspect-Oriented Software Development , 2008, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[41]  Erik P. de Vink,et al.  Architecting Security with Paradigm , 2008, WADS.

[42]  Ludovic Henrio,et al.  Behavioural Models for Hierarchical Components , 2005, SPIN.

[43]  Rob J. van Glabbeek,et al.  Branching time and abstraction in bisimulation semantics , 1996, JACM.

[44]  Gerti Kappel,et al.  Coordinated Collaboration of Objects , 2000, Advances in Object-Oriented Data Modeling.

[45]  Jean-Claude Royer,et al.  A Formal Architectural Description Language based on Symbolic Transition Systems and Temporal Logic , 2006, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..