Modeling Community with Tiles

1
Modeling Communitywith Tiles
Workshop AGILE, Pisa, 28-29 Luglio 2003
Roberto Bruni Dipartimento di Informatica
Università di Pisa
Ongoing Work!
joint work with Ivan Lanese Ugo
Montanari Dipartimento di Informatica Università
di Pisa
2
Roadmap

• Goal
• Tiles
• Translation
• Example Buffer
• Advantages
• Ongoing and future work
• Localities

3
Roadmap

• Goal
• Tiles
• Translation
• Example Buffer
• Advantages
• Ongoing and future work
• Localities

4
Goal

• Operational semantics for CommUnity
• Modular translation
• Preserving of separation of concerns
• Abstract semantics via observations

5
Roadmap

• Goal
• Tiles
• Translation
• Example Buffer
• Advantages
• Ongoing and future work
• Localities

6
Tile Logic

• Operational and Abstract Semantics of Open
  Concurrent Systems
• Compositional in Space and Time
• Specification Formats
• Depending on chosen connectors
• Congruence results
• Category based

7
Tiles
8
Configurations
input interface
output interface
9
Observations
initial interface
final interface
10
Roadmap

• Goal
• Tiles
• Translation
• Example Buffer
• Advantages
• Ongoing and future work
• Localities

11
Tile Format for CommUnity

• Interfaces
• action, input (typed), output (typed)
• System Configuration
• (gs-monoidal) graphs
• components empty input interface
• coordinators binary input interface
• Observations
• monoid of unary boxes
• Tiles
• computation (empty trigger)
• coordination

12
From Modules to Tile Configurations
I

o1v1 omvm p1w1 pkwk
I
O

O
A
externalization of the state?
13
From Modules to (Schemes of) Basic Tiles
I
actions are translated into tiles
?
O
A
(G)
one tile for any (?,w) that satisfies the guard
G of action act
I
?
O
A
14
Data Coordinators
I
I/O
I/O
v
v
v
I
I/O
I/O
15
Action Coordinators
A
(a1,b1) (an,bn)
A
bi
ai
A
(a1,b1) (an,bn)
A
16
From Diagramsto Tile Systems
17
Roadmap

• Goal
• Tiles
• Translation
• Example Buffer
• Advantages
• Ongoing and future work
• Localities

18
Buffer Design
design BUFFER tsort, nnat is in it out
ot prv blistt,n do put bltn ? bb.i
fwd bn ? ohead(b)
btail(b).i get bgt0 ? ohead(b)
btail(b) shft b0 ?
oi
19
A Buffer Configuration
BUFFERT,N
IT
ov bv1.v2vk
i
OT
o
A
20
Put as a Tile
IT
ov bv1.v2vk
OT
A
(kltN)
PUT
21
Building a Modular Buffer
design CABLE tsort is in it do fwd true
? skip shft true ? skip
CABLE
i fwd shft
BUFFERT,1
BUFFERT,1
i fwd put shft
o fwd get shft
22
Intuition
put ? fwd1 fwdk putk1 get ? getk shftk1
shftn shft ? shft1 shftn fwd ? fwd1 fwdn
23
Outcome

• Bisimilarity between BUFFERT,N and M buffers
  BUFFERT,K with NMK
• Bisimilarity between the system and its
  specification

24
Roadmap

• Goal
• Tiles
• Translation
• Example Buffer
• Advantages
• Ongoing and future work
• Localities

25
Preliminary Results and Advantages

• Concurrent operational semantics for CommUnity
• Translation independent from the serialization of
  represented morphisms
• Encoding of the colimit behaviourally equivalent
  to the diagram encoding
• Standard notion of abstract equivalence (tile
  bisimilarity)
• Separation of concerns

26
Roadmap

• Goal
• Tiles
• Translation
• Example Buffer
• Advantages
• Ongoing and future work
• Localities

27
Dealing with Localities

• Localities as data types
• input localities (IL) and output localities (OL)
• Actions can involve localities
• Observable constraints on localities
• dynamically generated via coordinators
• statical constraints on moves
• Open problems
• which flavour of connectors?
• what should be observed?

28
Future Work

• Application to AGILE case studies
• Dealing with system reconfigurations
• Refinement
• Common framework for CommUnity and UML