On the Discriminating Power of Testing Equivalences for Reactive Probabilistic Systems: Results and Open Problems

Testing equivalences have been deeply investigated on fully nondeterministic processes, as well as on processes featuring probabilities and internal nondeterminism. This is not the case with reactive probabilistic processes, for which it is only known that the discriminating power of probabilistic bisimilarity is achieved when admitting a copying capability within tests. In this paper, we introduce for reactive probabilistic processes three testing equivalences without copying, which are respectively based on reactive probabilistic tests, fully nondeterministic tests, and nondeterministic and probabilistic tests. We show that the three testing equivalences are strictly finer than probabilistic failure-trace equivalence, and that the one based on nondeterministic and probabilistic tests is strictly finer than the other two, which are incomparable with each other. Moreover, we provide a number of facts that lead us to conjecture that (i) may testing and must testing coincide on reactive probabilistic processes and (ii) nondeterministic and probabilistic tests reach the same discriminating power as probabilistic bisimilarity.

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

[2]  Joël Ouaknine,et al.  Domain theory, testing and simulation for labelled Markov processes , 2005, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[3]  Albert R. Meyer,et al.  Logic at Botik '89 , 1989, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

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

[5]  Lu Tian,et al.  On some equivalence relations for probabilistic processes , 1992, Fundamenta Informaticae.

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

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

[8]  Wang Yi,et al.  Testing and Refinement for Nondeterministic and Probabilistic Processes , 1994, FTRTFT.

[9]  Albert R. Meyer,et al.  A Remark on Bisimulation Between Probabilistic Processes , 1989, Logic at Botik.

[10]  Davide Sangiorgi,et al.  On the discriminating power of passivation and higher-order interaction , 2014, CSL-LICS.

[11]  Bernhard Steffen,et al.  Reactive, Generative and Stratified Models of Probabilistic Processes , 1995, Inf. Comput..

[12]  Brian Campbell,et al.  Amortised Memory Analysis Using the Depth of Data Structures , 2009, ESOP.

[13]  R. V. Glabbeek.  CHAPTER 1 – The Linear Time - Branching Time Spectrum I.* The Semantics of Concrete, Sequential Processes , 2001 .

[14]  Cnrs Fre,et al.  Model Checking a Path (Preliminary Report) , 2003 .

[15]  Rocco De Nicola,et al.  Relating strong behavioral equivalences for processes with nondeterminism and probabilities , 2013, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[16]  Rob J. van Glabbeek,et al.  The Linear Time - Branching Time Spectrum I , 2001, Handbook of Process Algebra.

[17]  Marta Z. Kwiatkowska,et al.  A Testing Equivalence for Reactive Probabilistic Processes , 1998, EXPRESS.

[18]  Carroll Morgan,et al.  Remarks on Testing Probabilistic Processes , 2007, Computation, Meaning, and Logic.

[19]  Abbas Edalat,et al.  Bisimulation for labelled Markov processes , 1997, Proceedings of Twelfth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[20]  Joost-Pieter Katoen,et al.  A probabilistic extension of UML statecharts: Specification and Verification. , 2002 .

[21]  Rocco De Nicola,et al.  Extensional equivalences for transition systems , 1987, Acta Informatica.

[22]  Insup Lee,et al.  CONCUR '95: Concurrency Theory , 1995, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[23]  Robert M. Keller,et al.  Formal verification of parallel programs , 1976, CACM.

[24]  Carroll Morgan,et al.  Characterising Testing Preorders for Finite Probabilistic Processes , 2007, 22nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS 2007).

[25]  Wang Yi,et al.  Testing Probabilistic and Nondeterministic Processes , 1992, PSTV.

[26]  Rob J. van Glabbeek,et al.  The Linear Time - Branching Time Spectrum II , 1993, CONCUR.

[27]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  Bisimilarity and Behaviour-Preserving Reconfigurations of Open Petri Nets , 2007, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

[28]  Rocco De Nicola,et al.  Testing Equivalences for Processes , 1984, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[29]  Nancy A. Lynch,et al.  Compositionality for Probabilistic Automata , 2003, CONCUR.

[30]  Roberto Segala,et al.  A Compositional Trace-Based Semantics for Probabilistic Automata , 1995, CONCUR.

[31]  Rocco De Nicola,et al.  Revisiting Trace and Testing Equivalences for Nondeterministic and Probabilistic Processes , 2012, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

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

[33]  Kim Guldstrand Larsen,et al.  Specification and refinement of probabilistic processes , 1991, [1991] Proceedings Sixth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[34]  Scott A. Smolka,et al.  Equivalences, Congruences, and Complete Axiomatizations for Probabilistic Processes , 1990, CONCUR.

[35]  Julian Bradfield.  CONCUR '96: Concurrency Theory , 1996 .

[36]  Roberto Segala,et al.  Testing Probabilistic Automata , 1996, CONCUR.

[37]  Roberto Segala,et al.  Modeling and verification of randomized distributed real-time systems , 1996 .

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

[39]  Wang Yi,et al.  Compositional testing preorders for probabilistic processes , 1995, Proceedings of Tenth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[40]  Abbas Edalat,et al.  Bisimulation for Labelled Markov Processes , 2002, Inf. Comput..

[41]  Christel Baier,et al.  Domain equations for probabilistic processes , 2000, Mathematical Structures in Computer Science.

[42]  Carroll Morgan,et al.  Scalar Outcomes Suffice for Finitary Probabilistic Testing , 2007, ESOP.

[43]  Martin L. Puterman,et al.  Markov Decision Processes: Discrete Stochastic Dynamic Programming , 1994 .