A simple approach to specifying concurrent systems
Communications of the ACM
A practical algorithm for static analysis of parallel programs
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing
Design and validation of computer protocols
Design and validation of computer protocols
Starvation and Critical Race Analyzers for Ada
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Temporal Logic-Based Deadlock Analysis for Ada
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
An Introduction to Proving the Correctness of Programs
ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)
Specifying Concurrent Program Modules
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS)
"Sometimes" and "not never" revisited: on branching versus linear time (preliminary report)
POPL '83 Proceedings of the 10th 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
The complexity of problems in systems of communicating sequential processes (Extended Abstract)
STOC '79 Proceedings of the eleventh annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Analysis of communicating finite-state processes
Analysis of communicating finite-state processes
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The commenters discuss several flaws they found in the above-titled paper by G.M. Koran and R.J.A. Burh. The commenters argue that the characterization of operational and axiomatic proof method is modified and inaccurate; the classification of modeling techniques for concurrent systems confuses the distinction between state-based and event-based models with the essential distinction between explicit enumeration of behaviors and symbolic manipulation of properties; the statements about the limitations of linear-time temporal logic in relation to nondeterminism are inaccurate; and the characterization of the computational complexity of the analysis technique is overly optimistic.