88 research outputs found

    Reversible Barbed Congruence on Configuration Structures

    Get PDF
    A standard contextual equivalence for process algebras is strong barbed congruence. Configuration structures are a denotational semantics for processes in which one can define equivalences that are more discriminating, i.e. that distinguish the denotation of terms equated by barbed congruence. Hereditary history preserving bisimulation (HHPB) is such a relation. We define a strong back and forth barbed congruence using a reversible process algebra and show that the relation induced by the back and forth congruence is equivalent to HHPB, providing a contextual characterization of HHPB.Comment: In Proceedings ICE 2015, arXiv:1508.0459

    Causal Consistency for Reversible Multiparty Protocols

    Get PDF
    In programming models with a reversible semantics, computational steps can be undone. This paper addresses the integration of reversible semantics into process languages for communication-centric systems equipped with behavioral types. In prior work, we introduced a monitors-as-memories approach to seamlessly integrate reversible semantics into a process model in which concurrency is governed by session types (a class of behavioral types), covering binary (two-party) protocols with synchronous communication. The applicability and expressiveness of the binary setting, however, is limited. Here we extend our approach, and use it to define reversible semantics for an expressive process model that accounts for multiparty (n-party) protocols, asynchronous communication, decoupled rollbacks, and abstraction passing. As main result, we prove that our reversible semantics for multiparty protocols is causally-consistent. A key technical ingredient in our developments is an alternative reversible semantics with atomic rollbacks, which is conceptually simple and is shown to characterize decoupled rollbacks.Comment: Extended, revised version of a PPDP'17 paper (https://doi.org/10.1145/3131851.3131864

    A general approach to derive uncontrolled reversible semantics

    Get PDF
    Reversible computing is a paradigm where programs can execute backward as well as in the usual forward direction. Reversible computing is attracting interest due to its applications in areas as different as biochemical modelling, simulation, robotics and debugging, among others. In concurrent systems the main notion of reversible computing is called causal-consistent reversibility, and it allows one to undo an action if and only if its consequences, if any, have already been undone. This paper presents a general and automatic technique to define a causal-consistent reversible extension for given forward models. We support models defined using a reduction semantics in a specific format and consider a causality relation based on resources consumed and produced. The considered format is general enough to fit many formalisms studied in the literature on causal-consistent reversibility, notably Higher-Order π-calculus and Core Erlang, an intermediate language in the Erlang compilation. Reversible extensions of these models in the literature are ad hoc, while we build them using the same general technique. This also allows us to show in a uniform way that a number of relevant properties, causal-consistency in particular, hold in the reversible extensions we build. Our technique also allows us to go beyond the reversible models in the literature: we cover a larger fragment of Core Erlang, including remote error handling based on links, which has never been considered in the reversibility literature

    A General Approach to Derive Uncontrolled Reversible Semantics

    Get PDF
    Reversible computing is a paradigm where programs can execute backward as well as in the usual forward direction. Reversible computing is attracting interest due to its applications in areas as different as biochemical modelling, simulation, robotics and debugging, among others. In concurrent systems the main notion of reversible computing is called causal-consistent reversibility, and it allows one to undo an action if and only if its consequences, if any, have already been undone. This paper presents a general and automatic technique to define a causal-consistent reversible extension for given forward models. We support models defined using a reduction semantics in a specific format and consider a causality relation based on resources consumed and produced. The considered format is general enough to fit many formalisms studied in the literature on causal-consistent reversibility, notably Higher-Order ?-calculus and Core Erlang, an intermediate language in the Erlang compilation. Reversible extensions of these models in the literature are ad hoc, while we build them using the same general technique. This also allows us to show in a uniform way that a number of relevant properties, causal-consistency in particular, hold in the reversible extensions we build. Our technique also allows us to go beyond the reversible models in the literature: we cover a larger fragment of Core Erlang, including remote error handling based on links, which has never been considered in the reversibility literature

    13th international workshop on expressiveness in concurrency

    Get PDF

    Causally consistent reversible choreographies: a monitors-as-memories approach

    Get PDF
    Under a reversible semantics, computation steps can be undone. This paper addresses the integration of reversible semantics into a process model of multiparty protocols (choreographies). Building upon the monitors-as-memories approach that we developed in prior work for reversible binary protocols, we present a reversible process framework for multiparty communication, which improves on prior models by seamlessly integrating asynchrony, decoupled rollbacks, and process passing. As main technical result, we prove that our multiparty, reversible semantics is causally-consistent

    Reversibility in the higher-order π-calculus

    Get PDF
    The notion of reversible computation is attracting increasing interest because of its applications in diverse fields, in particular the study of programming abstractions for reliable systems. In this paper, we continue the study un-dertaken by Danos and Krivine on reversible CCS by defining a reversible higher-order π-calculus, called rhoπ. We prove that reversibility in our cal-culus is causally consistent and that the causal information used to support reversibility in rhoπ is consistent with the one used in the causal semantics of the π-calculus developed by Boreale and Sangiorgi. Finally, we show that one can faithfully encode rhoπ into a variant of higher-order π, substantially improving on the result we obtained in the conference version of this paper

    Processes, Systems \& Tests: Defining Contextual Equivalences

    Full text link
    In this position paper, we would like to offer and defend a new template to study equivalences between programs -- in the particular framework of process algebras for concurrent computation.We believe that our layered model of development will clarify the distinction that is too often left implicit between the tasks and duties of the programmer and of the tester. It will also enlighten pre-existing issues that have been running across process algebras as diverse as the calculus of communicating systems, the π\pi-calculus -- also in its distributed version -- or mobile ambients.Our distinction starts by subdividing the notion of process itself in three conceptually separated entities, that we call \emph{Processes}, \emph{Systems} and \emph{Tests}.While the role of what can be observed and the subtleties in the definitions of congruences have been intensively studied, the fact that \emph{not every process can be tested}, and that \emph{the tester should have access to a different set of tools than the programmer} is curiously left out, or at least not often formally discussed.We argue that this blind spot comes from the under-specification of contexts -- environments in which comparisons takes place -- that play multiple distinct roles but supposedly always \enquote{stay the same}.We illustrate our statement with a simple Java example, the \enquote{usual} concurrent languages, but also back it up with λ\lambda-calculus and existing implementations of concurrent languages as well
    • …
    corecore