Algorithmic Verification of Asynchronous Programs

Asynchronous programming is a ubiquitous systems programming idiom to manage concurrent interactions with the environment. In this style, instead of waiting for time-consuming operations to complete, the programmer makes a non-blocking call to the operation and posts a callback task to a task buffer that is executed later when the time-consuming operation completes. A co-operative scheduler mediates the interaction by picking and executing callback tasks from the task buffer to completion (and these callbacks can post further callbacks to be executed later). Writing correct asynchronous programs is hard because the use of callbacks, while efficient, obscures program control flow. We provide a formal model underlying asynchronous programs and study verification problems for this model. We show that the safety verification problem for finite-data asynchronous programs is expspace-complete. We show that liveness verification for finite-data asynchronous programs is decidable and polynomial-time equivalent to Petri Net reachability. Decidability is not obvious, since even if the data is finite-state, asynchronous programs constitute infinite-state transition systems: both the program stack and the task buffer of pending asynchronous calls can be potentially unbounded. Our main technical construction is a polynomial-time semantics-preserving reduction from asynchronous programs to Petri Nets and conversely. The reduction allows the use of algorithmic techniques on Petri Nets to the verification of asynchronous programs. We also study several extensions to the basic models of asynchronous programs that are inspired by additional capabilities provided by implementations of asynchronous libraries, and classify the decidability and undecidability of verification questions on these extensions.Comment: 46 pages, 9 figure

Results of an experimental investigation to determine separation characteristics for the Orbiter/747 using a 0.0125-scale model (48-0 AX1318I-1 747) in the Ames Research Center 14-foot wind tunnel (CA23B)

Aerodynamic separation data obtained from a wind tunnel test of an 0.0125-scale SSV Orbiter model of a VC70-000002 Configuration and a 0.0125-scale 747 model was presented. Separation data was obtained at a Mach number of 0.6 and three incidence angles of 4, 6, and 8 degrees. The orbiter angle of attack was varied from 0 to 14 degrees. Longitudinal, lateral and normal separation increments were obtained for fixed 747 angles of attack of 0, 2, and 4 degrees while varying the orbiter angle of attack. Control surface settings on the 747 carrier included rudder deflections of 0 and 10 degrees and horizontal stabilizer deflections of -1 and +5 degrees

A cross-cultural comparison of Mexican Americans and non-Latino White Americans : does culture influence family cohesion and father involvement?

This quantitative research study is a preliminary assessment of family cohesion and father involvement in two cultural groups: Mexican American and non-Latino white American families with children between the ages of one to seven years old and of low to medium socioeconomic status. The line of inquiry is whether or not culture influences family cohesion and father involvement in this sample. The variables of family cohesion and father involvement were measured along with an examination of the effects of culture and acculturation on Mexican American families. The Family Circles instrument is a pictorial assessment tool used in this study to measure parents\u27 individual perceptions of family cohesion and father involvement in their family-of-origin and current nuclear family. The population studied was a subset of the California-based longitudinal Supporting Father Involvement study\u27s total sample. This study\u27s sample consisted of 86 mothers and 99 fathers who in total were 45.6% non-Latino white American (English monolingual) and 54.4% Mexican American (English or Spanish monolingual, and Bilingual). The findings of this study demonstrated that family cohesion and father involvement in depictions of family-of-origin and current nuclear family were more predominant in one of our study cross-cultural groups than the other

Results of an experimental aerodynamic investigation to obtain static stability and control characteristics of the SSV configurations: The 2A(VL70-000089B) model 1 and 3(VL70-000139B) model 2 orbiter at Mach numbers of 2.5, 3.9 and 4.6 in the NASA LaRC 4 X 4-foot UPWT (OA44)

Investigation of space shuttle orbiter configurations 2A(VL70-000089B) and 3(VL70-000139B) was performed at the Langley Research Center Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel (UPWT) from June 1, 1973, to June 15, 1973, for 60 test hours. The primary test objectives were to obtain stability and control characteristics for Configurations 2A and 3 and an alternate forebody used with Configuration 3. In addition, hinge moments were measured on the elevons and rudder for Configuration 2A only. The configurations were tested at Mach numbers 2.5, 3.9 and 4.6. Pitch runs were made at angles of attack from -4 to 44 deg and sideslip angles from -4 to +6. Static pressures were measured at the fuselage base for use in force data correction

Results of investigations with an 0.015-scale model (49-0) of the Rockwell International space shuttle vehicle 140A/B configuration with modified OMS pods and elevons in the AEDC VKF tunnel B (0A79)

Aerodynamic data obtained from wind tunnel tests of an 0.015-scale space shuttle vehicle Orbiter model of a 140A/B configuration with modified orbital manuevering system pods and elevons are documented. Force data was obtained at various control surface settings and Reynolds numbers in the angle of attack range of 15 deg to 45 deg and at angles of sideslip of -5 deg to +5 deg. Control surface variables included elevon, rudder, speed brake, and body flap configurations

Results of an air data probe investigation utilizing a 0.10 scale orbiter forebody (model 57-0) in the Ames Research Center 14-foot wind tunnel (OA220)

Results are presented of a 0.10 scale orbiter forebody test with left and right mounted air data probes (ADP) as well as a flight test probe (nose boom). Left and right ADP data were obtained at Mach numbers of .3, .4, .5, .6, .7, .8, .85, .9, .95, .98, 1.05 and 1.1 through a Reynolds number range of 1.3 to 4.4 million. Nose boom data were obtained at Mach numbers of .3, .4, .5, .6, .7, .9 and .98

Results of investigations on an 0.015 scale 140A/B configuration space shuttle vehicle orbiter model (49-0) in the LTV 4 by 4-foot high speed wind tunnel (0A84)

Data obtained from a wind tunnel test of an 0.015-scale 140 A/B configuration space shuttle vehicle orbiter model (49-0) are presented. Runs were conducted at Mach numbers 0.6, 0.9, 1.2, 1.6, and 2.0 and Reynolds numbers of 8.4, 9.0, 9.0, 10.9, and 13.6 million per foot respectively. Various control surface settings were investigated from angles of attack of minus 4 degrees to plus 30 degrees at fixed angles of sideslip of zero and minus 5 degrees and through angles of sideslip from minus 2 to plus 8 degrees at fixed angles of attack of zero, plus 10, plus 15, and plus 20 degrees. The purpose of the test was to define the longitudinal and lateral-directional stability and control characteristics for the updated SSV configuration

Differential elevon effectiveness lateral control optimization and elevon hinge moment investigation on a 0.015 scale space shuttle orbiter model 49-0 (140A/B/C modified) in the AECD VKF wind tunnel A (0A115)

Experimental aerodynamic investigations were conducted in the Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC) Von Karman Facility Tunnel A on a scale model of the space shuttle orbiter. The objectives of this test were: (1) determine supersonic differential elevon/aileron lateral control optimization, (2) determine supersonic elevon hinge moments, (3) determine the supersonic effects of the new baseline 6-inch elevon/elevon and elevon/fuselage gaps, and 4) determine the supersonic effects of the new short (VL70-008410) OMS pods. Six-component aerodynamic force, moment, and elevon hinge moment data were recorded

Entrevista a Fernando Álvarez: maqueta y aprendizaje

Peer Reviewe