Results 1 
7 of
7
Permissive Subsorted Partial Logic in CASL
, 1997
"... . This paper presents a permissive subsorted partial logic used in the CoFI Algebraic Specification Language. In contrast to other ordersorted logics, subsorting is not modeled by set inclusions, but by injective embeddings allowing for more general models in which subtypes can have different data t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 13 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. This paper presents a permissive subsorted partial logic used in the CoFI Algebraic Specification Language. In contrast to other ordersorted logics, subsorting is not modeled by set inclusions, but by injective embeddings allowing for more general models in which subtypes can have different data type representations. Furthermore, there are no restrictions like monotonicity, regularity or local filtration on signatures at all. Instead, the use of overloaded functions and predicates in formulae is required to be sufficiently disambiguated, such that all parses have the same semantics. An overload resolution algorithm is sketched. 1 Introduction During the past decades a large number of algebraic specification languages have been developed. The presence of so many similar specification languages with no common framework hinders the dissemination and application of research results in algebraic specification. In particular, it makes it difficult to produce educational material, to reus...
ObjectOriented Specification of Distributed Systems in the µCalculus and Maude
 ELECTRONIC NOTES IN THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
, 1997
"... We refine an abstract propertyoriented specification in the µcalculus to a specification in Maude. As an intermediate step, we use a structured specification in the µcalculus blended with propositions on states appropriate for objectoriented specification. We use the loose approach in refinement ..."
Abstract

Cited by 6 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We refine an abstract propertyoriented specification in the µcalculus to a specification in Maude. As an intermediate step, we use a structured specification in the µcalculus blended with propositions on states appropriate for objectoriented specification. We use the loose approach in refinement and refine data types as well as behavior. Throughout, our example is the bounded buffer.
Representations, Hierarchies, and Graphs of Institutions
, 1996
"... For the specification of abstract data types, quite a number of logical systems have been developed. In this work, we will try to give an overview over this variety. As a prerequisite, we first study notions of {\em representation} and embedding between logical systems, which are formalized as {\em ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
For the specification of abstract data types, quite a number of logical systems have been developed. In this work, we will try to give an overview over this variety. As a prerequisite, we first study notions of {\em representation} and embedding between logical systems, which are formalized as {\em institutions} here. Different kinds of representations will lead to a looser or tighter connection of the institutions, with more or less good possibilities of faithfully embedding the semantics and of reusing proof support. In the second part, we then perform a detailed ``empirical'' study of the relations among various wellknown institutions of total, ordersorted and partial algebras and firstorder structures (all with Horn style, i.e.\ universally quantified conditional, axioms). We thus obtain a {\em graph} of institutions, with different kinds of edges according to the different kinds of representations between institutions studied in the first part. We also prove some separation results, leading to a {\em hierarchy} of institutions, which in turn naturally leads to five subgraphs of the above graph of institutions. They correspond to five different levels of expressiveness in the hierarchy, which can be characterized by different kinds of conditional generation principles. We introduce a systematic notation for institutions of total, ordersorted and partial algebras and firstorder structures. The notation closely follows the combination of features that are present in the respective institution. This raises the question whether these combinations of features can be made mathematically precise in some way. In the third part, we therefore study the combination of institutions with the help of socalled parchments (which are certain algebraic presentations of institutions) and parchment morphisms. The present book is a revised version of the author's thesis, where a number of mathematical problems (pointed out by Andrzej Tarlecki) and a number of misuses of the English language (pointed out by Bernd KriegBr\"uckner) have been corrected. Also, the syntax of specifications has been adopted to that of the recently developed Common Algebraic Specification Language {\sc Casl} \cite{CASL/Summary,Mosses97TAPSOFT}.
Colimits of OrderSorted Specifications
 In Recent Trends in Algebraic Development Techniques, Proc. 12th International Workshop, WADT '97
"... . We prove cocompleteness of the category of CASL signatures, of monotone signatures, of strongly regular signatures and of strongly locally filtered signatures. This shows that using these signature categories is compatible with a pushout or colimit based module system. 1 Introduction "Given a spe ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. We prove cocompleteness of the category of CASL signatures, of monotone signatures, of strongly regular signatures and of strongly locally filtered signatures. This shows that using these signature categories is compatible with a pushout or colimit based module system. 1 Introduction "Given a species of structure, say widgets, then the result of interconnecting a system of widgets to form a superwidget corresponds to taking the colimit of the diagram of widgets in which the morphisms show how they are interconnected." J. Goguen [8] An important application of this is the slogan "Putting theories together to make specifications" [3]. That is, specifications should be developed in a modular way, using colimits to combine different modules properly. An orthogonal question is that of the logic that is used to specify the individual modules. Ordersorted algebra is a logic that has been proposed as a means to deal with exceptions, partiality and inheritance. See, among others, Goguen an...
Translating OBJ3 into CASL: the Institution Level
 In Recent Trends in Algebraic Development Techniques, Proc. 13th International Workshop, WADT '98
, 1998
"... We translate OBJ3 to CASL. At the level of basic specifications, we set up several institution representations between the underlying institutions. They correspond to different methodological views of OBJ3. The translations can be the basis for automated tools translating OBJ3 to CASL. ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We translate OBJ3 to CASL. At the level of basic specifications, we set up several institution representations between the underlying institutions. They correspond to different methodological views of OBJ3. The translations can be the basis for automated tools translating OBJ3 to CASL.
Subsorting in CASL  CoFI Language Design Study Note
, 1996
"... Contents 1 The semantics of subsorting 1 1.1 Concrete representation of manysorted terms and sentences . . . . . 2 1.2 Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Subsorted sentences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.4 Models . . . . ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Contents 1 The semantics of subsorting 1 1.1 Concrete representation of manysorted terms and sentences . . . . . 2 1.2 Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Subsorted sentences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.4 Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 The language for expressing subsorting 3 2.1 Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2 Predicative subsorts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.3 Axioms and Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3.1 CASLterms and atomic sentences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3.2 Expansion of terms and sentences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3.3 Equivalent expansions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.4 Type definition group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.5 Multiple representa
Algebraic System Specification and Development: Survey and Annotated Bibliography  Second Edition 
, 1997
"... Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.5.4 Special Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.6 Semantics of Programming Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.6.1 Semantics of Ada . . . ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.5.4 Special Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.6 Semantics of Programming Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.6.1 Semantics of Ada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.6.2 Action Semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.7 Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 4.7.1 Early Algebraic Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 4.7.2 Recent Algebraic Specification Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.7.3 The Common Framework Initiative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 5 Methodology 57 5.1 Development Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 5.1.1 Applica...