POPL '81 Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
Impartiality, Justice and Fairness: The Ethics of Concurrent Termination
Proceedings of the 8th Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
Distributed algorithms for synchronizing interprocess communication within real time
STOC '81 Proceedings of the thirteenth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Termination of Probabilistic Concurrent Program
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS)
Automatic Verification of Probabilistic Free Choice
VMCAI '02 Revised Papers from the Third International Workshop on Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation
Verification of multiprocess probabilistic protocols
PODC '84 Proceedings of the third annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing
On the extremely fair treatment of probabilistic algorithms
STOC '83 Proceedings of the fifteenth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Deductive Verification of Probabilistic Real-Time Systems
ICDCSW '04 Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops - W7: EC (ICDCSW'04) - Volume 7
Parameterized verification by probabilistic abstraction
FOSSACS'03/ETAPS'03 Proceedings of the 6th International conference on Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures and joint European conference on Theory and practice of software
ICESS'05 Proceedings of the Second international conference on Embedded Software and Systems
p-Automata: New foundations for discrete-time probabilistic verification
Performance Evaluation
Reasoning about almost-certain convergence properties using Event-B
Science of Computer Programming
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The asynchronous execution behavior of several concurrent processes, which may use randomization, is studied. Viewing each process as a discrete Markov chain over the set of common execution states, we give necessary and sufficient conditions for the processes to converge almost surely to a given set of goal states, under any fair, but otherwise arbitrary schedule, provided that the state space is finite. (These conditions can be checked mechanically.) An interesting feature of the proof method is that it depends only on the topology of the transitions and not on the actual values of the probabilities. We also show that in our model synchronization protocols that use randomization are in certain cases no more powerful than deterministic protocols. This is demonstrated by (a) Proving lower bounds on the size of a shared variable necessary to ensure mutual exlusion and lockout-free behavior of the protocol; and (b) Showing that no fully symmetric 'randomized' protocol can ensure mutual exclusion and freedom from lockout.