“Sometimes” and “not never” revisited: on branching versus linear time temporal logic
Journal of the ACM (JACM) - The MIT Press scientific computation series
Three partition refinement algorithms
SIAM Journal on Computing
Characterizing finite Kripke structures in propositional temporal logic
Theoretical Computer Science - International Joint Conference on Theory and Practice of Software Development, P
Temporal abstract interpretation
Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
Making abstract interpretations complete
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
POPL '77 Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages
"Sometime" is sometimes "not never": on the temporal logic of programs
POPL '80 Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
Systematic design of program analysis frameworks
POPL '79 Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages
On the Completeness of Model Checking
ESOP '01 Proceedings of the 10th European Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems
An Efficient Algorithm for Branching Bisimulation and Stuttering Equivalence
ICALP '90 Proceedings of the 17th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
Branching vs. Linear Time: Final Showdown
TACAS 2001 Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems
Sometimes and Not Never Re-revisited: On Branching Versus Linear Time
CONCUR '98 Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Concurrency Theory
Relating linear and branching model checking
PROCOMET '98 Proceedings of the IFIP TC2/WG2.2,2.3 International Conference on Programming Concepts and Methods
Expressibility results for linear-time and branching-time logics
Linear Time, Branching Time and Partial Order in Logics and Models for Concurrency, School/Workshop
Freedom, Weakness, and Determinism: From Linear-Time to Branching-Time
LICS '98 Proceedings of the 13th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science
The common fragment of CTL and LTL
FOCS '00 Proceedings of the 41st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
An abstract interpretation-based refinement algorithm for strong preservation
TACAS'05 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems
Imcompleteness of States w.r.t traces in model Checking
Information and Computation
Incompleteness of states w.r.t. traces in model checking
Information and Computation
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
It is known that the branching time language ACTL and the linear time language ∀ LTL of universally quantified formulae of LTL have incomparable expressive powers, i.e., Sem(ACTL) and Sem(∀LTL) are incomparable sets. Within a standard abstract interpretation framework, ACTL can be viewed as an abstract interpretation LTL∀ of LTL where the universal path quantifier ∀ abstracts each linear temporal operator of LTL to a corresponding branching state temporal operator of ACTL. In abstract interpretation terms, it turns out that the universal path quantifier abstraction of LTL is incomplete. In this paper we reason on a generic abstraction α over a domain A of a generic linear time language L. This approach induces both a language αL of α-abstracted formulae of L and an abstract language Lα whose operators are the best correct abstractions in A of the linear operators of L. When the abstraction α is complete for the operators in L it turns out that α L and Lα have the same expressive power, so that trace-based model checking of α L can be reduced with no lack of precision to A-based model checking of Lα. This abstract interpretation-based approach allows to compare temporal languages at different levels of abstraction and to view the standard linear vs. branching time comparison as a particular instance.