Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1402.5365

Revisiting Trace and Testing Equivalences for Nondeterministic and Probabilistic Processes

Abstract

Two of the most studied extensions of trace and testing equivalences to nondeterministic and probabilistic processes induce distinctions that have been questioned and lack properties that are desirable. Probabilistic trace-distribution equivalence differentiates systems that can perform the same set of traces with the same probabilities, and is not a congruence for parallel composition. Probabilistic testing equivalence, which relies only on extremal success probabilities, is backward compatible with testing equivalences for restricted classes of processes, such as fully nondeterministic processes or generative/reactive probabilistic processes, only if specific sets of tests are admitted. In this paper, new versions of probabilistic trace and testing equivalences are presented for the general class of nondeterministic and probabilistic processes. The new trace equivalence is coarser because it compares execution probabilities of single traces instead of entire trace distributions, and turns out to be compositional. The new testing equivalence requires matching all resolutions of nondeterminism on the basis of their success probabilities, rather than comparing only extremal success probabilities, and considers success probabilities in a trace-by-trace fashion, rather than cumulatively on entire resolutions. It is fully backward compatible with testing equivalences for restricted classes of processes; as a consequence, the trace-by-trace approach uniformly captures the standard probabilistic testing equivalences for generative and reactive probabilistic processes. The paper discusses in full details the new equivalences and provides a simple spectrum that relates them with existing ones in the setting of nondeterministic and probabilistic processes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Marco Bernardo, Rocco De Nicola, Michele Loreti. 2014-03-04. Revisiting Trace and Testing Equivalences for Nondeterministic and Probabilistic Processes. https://doi.org/10.2168/lmcs-10(1%3A16)2014

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Deciding Predicate Logical Theories of Real-Valued Functions

The notion of a real-valued function is central to mathematics, computer science, and many other scientific fields. Despite this importance, there are hardly any positive results on decision procedures for predicate logical theories that reason about real-valued functions. This paper defines a first-order predicate language for reasoning about multi-dimensional smooth real-valued functions and their derivatives, and demonstrates that - despite the obvious undecidability barriers - certain positive decidability results for such a language are indeed possible.

cs.LO

Structural Liveness of Conservative Petri Nets

We show that the EXPSPACE-hardness result for structural liveness of Petri nets [Jancar and Purser, 2019] holds even for a simple subclass of conservative nets. As our main result, we prove that for structurally live conservative nets, the values of the minimal live markings are at most doubly exponential in the size of the net. This implies the EXPSPACE-completeness of structural liveness for conservative Petri nets. The result also applies to structurally bounded Petri nets, whereas the complexity of the general case remains open. As a proof ingredient of independent interest, we present an extension of known results on the bounds of minimal integer solutions to Boolean combinations of linear equalities, inequalities, and divisibility constraints.

cs.LO

Verifying Numerical Methods with Isabelle/HOL

Modern machine learning pipelines and ODE solvers are built on numerical algorithms. Reliable numerical methods are thus a prerequisite for trustworthy machine learning and cyber-physical systems. We evaluate a framework designed for verifying imperative programs and the Isabelle proof assistant as tools for proving the total correctness of four numerical algorithms: the bisection method, the fixed-point method, the perceptron, and the gradient descent algorithm. Our verifications required subtle extensions and generalisations to Isabelle's version of Taylor's theorem and higher-order derivatives. Finally, we reflect on the framework's automation, friendly syntax, and on further requirements to turn it into a verification tool for numerical methods.

cs.LO