Results 1 
5 of
5
An Automatatheoretic Approach to Interprocedural Dataflow Analysis
, 1999
"... . We show that recent progress in extending the automatatheoretic approach to modelchecking beyond the class of finitestate processes finds a natural application in the area of interprocedural dataflow analysis. Keywords: Interprocedural dataflow analysis, modelchecking, automata theory, progra ..."
Abstract

Cited by 53 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. We show that recent progress in extending the automatatheoretic approach to modelchecking beyond the class of finitestate processes finds a natural application in the area of interprocedural dataflow analysis. Keywords: Interprocedural dataflow analysis, modelchecking, automata theory, program optimisation. 1 Introduction Recent work [15, 24] has shown that modelchecking algorithms for abstract classes of infinitestate systems, like contextfree processes [1, 5] and pushdown processes [6], find a natural application in the area of dataflow analysis (DFA) for programming languages with procedures [16], usually called interprocedural DFA. A large variety of DFA problems, whose solution is required by optimising compilers in order to apply performance improving transformations, can be solved by means of a unique modelchecking technique. The techniques of [5, 6] are based on what could be called the fixpoint approach to modelchecking [24], in which the set of states satisfying...
Compiler Correctness for Parallel Languages
, 1994
"... We present a paradigm for proving the correctness of compilers for languages with parallelism. The source language is given a denotational semantics as a compositional translation to a higherorder process calculus. The target language is also given a denotational semantics as a compositional transl ..."
Abstract

Cited by 11 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a paradigm for proving the correctness of compilers for languages with parallelism. The source language is given a denotational semantics as a compositional translation to a higherorder process calculus. The target language is also given a denotational semantics as a compositional translation to the same process calculus. We show the compiler is correct in that it preserves denotation up to bisimulation. The target language is also given an operational semantics, and this operational semantics is shown correct in the sense that it is branchingbisimilar to the denotational semantics of the target language. Together, these results show that for any program, the operational semantics of the target code is branchingbisimilar to the semantics of the source code. 1 Introduction In a series of papers in the early 80's [35, 34, 36, 12] we proposed a paradigm for semanticsbased compiler correctness, and over the last several years we have begun putting this paradigm into practic...
Axiomatisations of Weak Equivalences for De Simone Languages
 Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Concurrency Theory CONCUR'95
, 1995
"... . Aceto, Bloom and Vaandrager proposed in [ABV92] a procedure for generating a complete axiomatisation of strong bisimulation for process languages in the GSOS format. However, the choice operator +, which the procedure uses, as well as other auxiliary GSOS operators, which it introduces to obtain a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. Aceto, Bloom and Vaandrager proposed in [ABV92] a procedure for generating a complete axiomatisation of strong bisimulation for process languages in the GSOS format. However, the choice operator +, which the procedure uses, as well as other auxiliary GSOS operators, which it introduces to obtain a finite axiomatisation, do not preserve many of weak equivalences. We propose a modification of this procedure, which works for a subclass of process languages in the De Simone format with a special treatment of silent actions. A choice of such a subclass of process languages guarantees that all the considered and auxiliary operators preserve many of weak equivalences. Our procedure generates a complete axiomatisation of refusal simulation preorder and it can be easily adapted to coarser preorders. The completeness result depends on the completeness result for the basic process language, which we prove. This language does not use prefixing with ΓΈ and the choice operator +. Instead, we employ...
Finite axiom systems for testing preorder and De Simone Process Languages
, 2000
"... We prove that testing preorder of De Nicola and Hennessy is preserved by all operators of De Simone process languages. Building upon this result we propose an algorithm for generating axiomatisations of testing preorder for arbitrary De Simone process languages. The axiom systems produced by our alg ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove that testing preorder of De Nicola and Hennessy is preserved by all operators of De Simone process languages. Building upon this result we propose an algorithm for generating axiomatisations of testing preorder for arbitrary De Simone process languages. The axiom systems produced by our algorithm are finite and complete for processes with nite behaviour. In order to achieve completeness for a subclass of processes with infiite behaviour we use one infinitary induction rule. The usefulness of our results is illustrated in specification and verification of small concurrent systems, where suspension, resumption and alternation of execution of component systems occur. We argue that better speci cations can be written in customised De Simone process languages, which contain both the standard operators as well as new De Simone operators that are specifically tailored for the task in hand. Moreover, the automatically generated axiom systems for such specification languages make the verification more straightforward.
by Elaine Gouvea Pimentel  Marcelo Luiz Silva RT 0XX/98
"... Contents 1 Introduc~ao 1 1.1 Especificando a Sintaxe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 Semantica Operacional Estruturada: Express~oes 5 3 Semantica Operacional Estruturada: Comandos 9 4 Extens~oes de TINY 13 4.1 N~ao Determinismo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Contents 1 Introduc~ao 1 1.1 Especificando a Sintaxe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 Semantica Operacional Estruturada: Express~oes 5 3 Semantica Operacional Estruturada: Comandos 9 4 Extens~oes de TINY 13 4.1 N~ao Determinismo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4.2 Paralelismo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 i Chapter 1 Introduc~ao Em semantica operacional nos preocupamos como programas s~ao executados, e n~ao apenas quais s~ao os resultados da execuc~ao. Mais precisamente, estamos interessados em como os estados s~ao modificados durante a execuc~ao de um comando ou a avaliac~ao de uma express~ao. Existem duas abordagens poss'iveis para o estudo de semantica operacional: ffl Semantica natural  descreve como os resultados finais de execuc~ao s~ao obtidos; ffl Semantica operacional estruturada