An analytical and experimental comparison of CSP extensions and tools
Communicating Sequential Processes (CSP) has been widely applied to modeling and analyzing concurrent systems. There have been considerable efforts on enhancing CSP by taking data and other system aspects into account. For instance, CSP M combines CSP with a functional programming language whereas C...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sis_research/5023 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sis_research/article/6026/viewcontent/an_analytical.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | Communicating Sequential Processes (CSP) has been widely applied to modeling and analyzing concurrent systems. There have been considerable efforts on enhancing CSP by taking data and other system aspects into account. For instance, CSP M combines CSP with a functional programming language whereas CSP# integrates high-level CSP-like process operators with low-level procedure code. Little work has been done to systematically compare these CSP extensions, which may have subtle and substantial differences. In this paper, we compare CSP M and CSP# not only on their syntax, but also operational semantics as well as their supporting tools such as FDR, ProB, and PAT. We conduct extensive experiments to compare the performance of these tools in different settings. Our comparison can be used to guide users to choose the appropriate CSP extension and verification tool based on the system characteristics. |
|---|