Email Gateway (Aug 22 2022 at 11:06): Email Gateway (Aug 22 2022 at 11:06):From: Tobias Nipkow <nipkow@in.tum.de>
Analysing and Comparing Encodability Criteria for Process Calculi
Kirstin Peters and Rob van Glabbeek
Encodings or the proof of their absence are the main way to compare process
calculi. To analyse the quality of encodings and to rule out trivial or
meaningless encodings, they are augmented with quality criteria. There exists a
bunch of different criteria and different variants of criteria in order to
reason in different settings. This leads to incomparable results. Moreover it is
not always clear whether the criteria used to obtain a result in a particular
setting do indeed fit to this setting. We show how to formally reason about and
compare encodability criteria by mapping them on requirements on a relation
between source and target terms that is induced by the encoding function. In
particular we analyse the common criteria full abstraction, operational
correspondence, divergence reflection, success sensitiveness, and respect of
barbs; e.g. we analyse the exact nature of the simulation relation (coupled
simulation versus bisimulation) that is induced by different variants of
operational correspondence. This way we reduce the problem of analysing or
comparing encodability criteria to the better understood problem of comparing
relations on processes.
http://afp.sourceforge.net/entries/Encodability_Process_Calculi.shtml
smime.p7s
Last updated: Apr 16 2024 at 08:18 UTC