Decidability, behavioural equivalences and infinite transition graphs

This thesis studies behavioural equivalences on labelled infinite transition graphs and the role that they can play in the context of modal logics and notions from language theory. A natural class of such infinite graphs is that corresponding to the SnS -definable tree languages first studied by Rabin. We show that a modal mu-calculus with label s et f0; : : : ; n 1g can define these tree languages up to an observational equivalence. Another natural class of infinite transition graphs is that of normed BPA processes , which correspond to the graphs of leftmost derivations in context-free grammars w ithout useless productions. A remarkable result is that strong bisimulation is decidabl e for these graphs. After an outline of the existing proofs due to Baeten et al. and Caucal we pr esent a much simpler proof using a tableau system closely related to the branching al gorithms employed in language theory following Korenjak and Hopcroft. We then present a result due to Colin Stirling, giving a weakly sound and complete sequent-based equational theory for bisimulation equivalence for normed BPA processes from the tableau sys tem. Moreover, we show how to extract a fundamental relation (as in the work of Caucal) from a successful tableau. We then introduce silent actions and consider a class of normed BPA processes wit h the restriction that processes cannot terminate silently, showing that the de cidability result for strong bisimilarity can be extended to van Glabbeek’s branching bisim ulation equivalence for this class of processes. We complete the picture by establishing that all other known behavioural equivalences and a number of preorders are undecidable for normed BPA processes.

[1]  David Walker,et al.  Local Model Checking in the Modal mu-Calculus , 1991, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[2]  Jan A. Bergstra,et al.  Decidability of Bisimulation Equivalence for Processes Generating Context-Free Languages , 1987, PARLE.

[3]  Wolfgang Thomas,et al.  Automata on Infinite Objects , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics.

[4]  R. J. vanGlabbeek The linear time - branching time spectrum , 1990 .

[5]  Robin Milner,et al.  A Complete Inference System for a Class of Regular Behaviours , 1984, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[6]  Kim G. Larsen,et al.  Bisimulation through Probabilistic Testing , 1991, Inf. Comput..

[7]  Didier Caucal Décidabiité de l'égalité des Languages Algébriques Infinitaires Simples , 1986, STACS.

[8]  Didier Caucal,et al.  On the Regular Structure of Prefix Rewriting , 1990, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[9]  Emily P. Friedman The Inclusion Problem for Simple Languages , 1976, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Wolfgang Thomas,et al.  Computation Tree Logic CTL* and Path Quantifiers in the Monadic Theory of the Binary Tree , 1987, ICALP.

[11]  Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.  Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation , 1979 .

[12]  Hans Hüttel,et al.  Silence is Golden: Branching Bisimilarity is Decidable for Context-Free Processes , 1991, CAV.

[13]  Hans Hüttel SnS Can be Modally Characterized , 1990, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[14]  Didier Caucal,et al.  Graphes canoniques de graphes algébriques , 1990, RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl..

[15]  C. A. R. Hoare,et al.  Communicating sequential processes , 1978, CACM.

[16]  Iain Phillips,et al.  Refusal Testing , 1986, Theoretical Computer Science.

[17]  Dexter Kozen,et al.  Results on the Propositional µ-Calculus , 1982, ICALP.

[18]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Using Branching Time Temporal Logic to Synthesize Synchronization Skeletons , 1982, Sci. Comput. Program..

[19]  Jan Friso Groote,et al.  Transition System Specifications with Negative Premises , 1993, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[20]  Albert R. Meyer,et al.  Bisimulation can't be traced , 1988, POPL '88.

[21]  Albert R. Meyer,et al.  WEAK MONADIC SECOND ORDER THEORY OF SUCCESSOR IS NOT ELEMENTARY-RECURSIVE , 1973 .

[22]  David Park,et al.  Concurrency and Automata on Infinite Sequences , 1981, Theoretical Computer Science.

[23]  Samson Abramsky,et al.  Handbook of logic in computer science. , 1992 .

[24]  Colin Stirling,et al.  Modal Logics for Communicating Systems , 1987, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[25]  Joost Engelfriet,et al.  Determinacy - (Observation Equivalence = Trace Equivalence) , 1985, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[26]  S. Sieber On a decision method in restricted second-order arithmetic , 1960 .

[27]  Scott A. Smolka,et al.  CCS expressions, finite state processes, and three problems of equivalence , 1983, PODC '83.

[28]  Jan Friso Groote,et al.  Structural Operational Semantics and Bisimulation as a Congruence (Extended Abstract) , 1989, ICALP.

[29]  John E. Hopcroft,et al.  Simple Deterministic Languages , 1966, SWAT.

[30]  Robin Milner,et al.  A Calculus of Communicating Systems , 1980, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[31]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Characterizing Kripke Structures in Temporal Logic , 1987, TAPSOFT, Vol.1.

[32]  Pierre Wolper Temporal Logic Can Be More Expressive , 1983, Inf. Control..

[33]  David E. Muller,et al.  The Theory of Ends, Pushdown Automata, and Second-Order Logic , 1985, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[34]  Samson Abramsky,et al.  Observation Equivalence as a Testing Equivalence , 1987, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[35]  Rocco De Nicola,et al.  Back and Forth Bisimulations , 1990, CONCUR.

[36]  Robin Milner,et al.  Communication and concurrency , 1989, PHI Series in computer science.

[37]  Damian Niwinski,et al.  Fixed points vs. infinite generation , 1988, [1988] Proceedings. Third Annual Information Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[38]  Jan A. Bergstra,et al.  Readies and Failures in the Algebra of Communicating Processes , 1988, SIAM J. Comput..

[39]  C. A. R. Hoare,et al.  A Theory of Communicating Sequential Processes , 1984, JACM.

[40]  Jan A. Bergstra,et al.  Process theory based on bisimulation semantics , 1988, REX Workshop.

[41]  J.J.C. Meijer,et al.  Refinement in branching time semantics , 1989 .

[42]  E. Allen Emerson,et al.  The Propositional Mu-Calculus is Elementary , 1984, ICALP.

[43]  Matthew Hennessy,et al.  Algebraic theory of processes , 1988, MIT Press series in the foundations of computing.

[44]  M. Rabin Decidability of second-order theories and automata on infinite trees , 1968 .

[45]  Stephen D. Brookes,et al.  Possible futures, acceptances, refusals, and communicating processes , 1981, 22nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1981).

[46]  Rob J. van Glabbeek,et al.  Branching Time and Abstraction in Bisimulation Semantics (Extended Abstract) , 1989, IFIP Congress.

[47]  Robin Milner,et al.  Algebraic laws for nondeterminism and concurrency , 1985, JACM.

[48]  Didier Caucal,et al.  On the transition graphs of automata and grammars , 1990, WG.

[49]  Colin Stirling,et al.  Verifying Temporal Properties of Processes , 1990, CONCUR.

[50]  Pierre Wolper,et al.  Reasoning about infinite computation paths , 1983, 24th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1983).

[51]  Jan A. Bergstra,et al.  Process Algebra for Synchronous Communication , 1984, Inf. Control..