Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Human-Computer Interaction

On Graph(ic) Encodings

Profile image of Ivan LaneseIvan Lanese

2005

Abstract

This paper is an informal summary of different encoding techniques from process calculi and distributed formalisms to graphic frameworks. The survey includes the use of solo diagrams, term graphs, synchronized hyperedge replacement systems, bigraphs, tile models and interactive systems, all presented at the Dagstuhl Seminar 04241. The common theme of all techniques recalled here is having a graphic presentation that, at the same time, gives both an intuitive visual rendering (of processes, states, etc.) and a rigorous mathematical framework.

Related papers

Visualization of Distributed Algorithms Based on Graph Relabelling Systems
Yves Métivier, Afif Sellami, Mohamed Mosbah

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 2001

View PDFchevron_right
Defining visual notations and their manipulation through meta-modelling and graph transformation
Juan Lara

Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 2004

This paper presents a framework for the definition of visual notations (both syntax and semantics) based on meta-modelling and graph transformation. With meta-modelling it is possible to define the syntax of the notations we want to deal with. Meta-modelling tools are able to generate environments which accept models in the defined formalisms. These can be provided with further functionality by defining operations that can be performed to the models. One of the ways of defining such manipulations is through graph grammars, because models and meta-models can be represented as attributed, typed graphs. In this way, computations become high-level models expressed in the formal, graphical and intuitive notation of graph grammars. As an example, AToM 3 is used to automatically generate a tool for a Discrete Event Simulation notation. The tool's functionality has been completely defined in a visual way through graph grammars, and includes a simulator (formalism's operational semantics), a transformation into Timed Transition Petri nets (denotational semantics), an optimizer and a code generator for a GPSS simulator. r maintain. In this way, developers deal with less (accidental) details about the system they are building and concentrate on describing its essential properties [1].

View PDFchevron_right
An Algebra of Hierarchical Graphs and its Application to Structural Encoding
Alberto Lluch Lafuente

2010

We define an algebraic theory of hierarchical graphs, whose axioms characterise graph isomorphism: two terms are equated exactly when they represent the same graph. Our algebra can be understood as a high-level language for describing graphs with a node-sharing, embedding structure, and it is then well suited for defining graphical representations of software models where nesting and linking are key aspects. In particular, we propose the use of our graph formalism as a convenient way to describe configurations in process calculi equipped with inherently hierarchical features such as sessions, locations, transactions, membranes or ambients. The graph syntax can be seen as an intermediate representation language, that facilitates the encodings of algebraic specifications, since it provides primitives for nesting, name restriction and parallel composition. In addition, proving soundness and correctness of an encoding (i.e. proving that structurally equivalent processes are mapped to isomorphic graphs) becomes easier as it can be done by induction over the graph syntax.

View PDFchevron_right
Formal manipulation of Forrester diagrams by graph grammars
jose dolado

IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1988

View PDFchevron_right
Formal relationship between Petri nets and graph grammars as basis for animation views in GenGED
Roswitha Bardohl

2002

Specification techniques like Petri nets allow for the formal description and analysis of systems. Although tool support exists for many different Petri net classes and tasks, a domain-specific animation of net behavior, however, is not yet supported by many Petri net tools.

View PDFchevron_right
Graphical Language for Discrete-Time Processes
Dylan Rupel

2016

We investigate the hierarchical structure of processes using the mathematical theory of operads. Information or material enters a given process as a stream of inputs, and the process converts it to a stream of outputs. Output streams can then be supplied to other processes in an organized manner, and the resulting system of interconnected processes can itself be considered a macro process. To model the inherent structure in this kind of system, we define an operad W of black boxes and directed wiring diagrams, and we define a W-algebra P of processes (which we call propagators, after [RS]). Previous operadic models of wiring diagrams (e.g. [Sp2]) use undirected wires without length, useful for modeling static systems of constraints, whereas we use directed wires with length, useful for modeling dynamic flows of information. We give multiple examples throughout to ground the ideas. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. W, the operad of directed wiring diagrams 5 3. P, the algebra of propagators on W 18 4. Future work 34 References 36

View PDFchevron_right
Application of graph transformation to visual languages, Handbook of graph grammars and computing by graph transformation: vol. 2: applications, languages, and tools
Andy Schürr

1999

View PDFchevron_right
Correct transformation: From object-based graph grammars to PROMELA
Fernando Dotti

Science of Computer Programming, 2012

Model transformation is an approach that, among other advantages, enables the reuse of existing analysis and implementation techniques, languages and tools. The area of formal verification makes wide use of model transformation because the cost of constructing efficient model checkers is extremely high. There are various examples of translations from specification and programming languages to the input languages of prominent model checking tools, like SPIN. However, this approach provides a safe analysis method only if there is a guarantee that the transformation process preserves the semantics of the original specification/program, that is, that the transformation is correct. Depending on the source and/or target languages, this notion of correctness is not easy to achieve. In this paper, we tackle this problem in the context of Object-Based Graph Grammars (OBGG). OBGG is a formal language suitable for the specification of distributed systems, with a variety of tools and techniques centered around the transformation of OBGG models. We describe in details the model transformation from OBGG models to PROMELA, the input language of the SPIN model checker. Amongst the contributions of this paper are: (a) the correctness proof of the transformation from OBGG models to PROMELA; (b) a generalization of this process in steps that may be used as a guide to prove the correctness of transformations from different specification/programming languages to PROMELA. 215 intuitive level. Graph rules may complementarily be used to capture the dynamical aspects of systems. The resulting notion of Graph Grammar [3,1,4] generalizes Chomsky grammars from strings to graphs. Due to their declarative nature, GGs are well-suited for concurrent systems' specification and have already been used for the specification of distributed systems . The basic idea is to model the states of a system as graphs and describe the possible state changes as rules (where the left-and right-hand sides are graphs). The behavior of the system is then described via applications of these rules to graphs describing the actual states of a system. Rules operate locally on the state-graph, and therefore it is possible that many rules are applied at the same time. Although formal, GGs are considered intuitive and easy to learn. Thus, this formalism is a good candidate to be integrated and used by the wide community which currently adopts semi-formal, often visual, methods like UML.

View PDFchevron_right
Defining Visual Languages by Algebraic Specification Techniques and Graph Grammars
Roswitha Bardohl

This contribution follows the line of research to formally de ne a visual language by algebraic concepts and techniques. In this paper, a graphic i.e. a sentence of a visual language, is equipped with an underlying graph structure. This is done in a way that each graph object of the graph structure is represented by a graphic which may be a complex one. Graph structures are regarded as n-sorted algebras to equational speci cations. The symbols of the underlying alphabet are visually represented by graphics and formulated by di erent sorts. The operations de ne how the symbols are linked and the equation part formulates layout constraints. Algebraic graph grammars are used to describe the visual language by using the prede ned symbols and links. Based on these theoretical concepts we sketch how a visual language can be visually de ned using di erent graphical editors.

View PDFchevron_right
Graphical Construction of Parallel Programs
George Justo

Parallel programming is not difficult, as the programs build up their complex behaviours in a similar way to the real world (i.e through the simple interaction of independent and simple entities). The parallel system engineer needs, however, a systematic method to decomposing the networks into independent ones or composing existing processes to form new networks. In this paper, we introduce a technique for the graphical construction of hierarchical networks (or configurations) of processes. The technique focuses on the concept of templates which define reusable patterns of communication and synchronisation for processes. We introduce a set of graphical rules based on the equivalence between processes, more specifically templates, and networks (configurations) of templates. The rules can be used to decompose networks of processes by substituting a single process for an equivalent sub-network of processes, or to abstract a sub-network of processes as a single process in order to simpl...

View PDFchevron_right

References (55)

  1. M. Abadi and A.D. Gordon. A calculus for cryptographic protocols: The spi calculus. In- form. and Comput., 148(1):1-70, 1999.
  2. A. Asperti and S. Guerrini. The Optimal Implementation of Functional Programming Lan- guages, volume 45 of Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science. Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 1998.
  3. P. Baldan, A. Corradini, H. Ehrig, M. Löwe, U. Montanari, and F. Rossi. Concurrent se- mantics of algebraic graph transformation. In H. Ehrig, H.-J. Kreowski, U. Montanari, and G. Rozenberg, editors, Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transfor- mation, volume 3, pages 107-187. World Scientific, 1999.
  4. M. Boreale, M. Buscemi, and U. Montanari. D-fusion: a distinctive fusion calculus. In W.- N. Chin, editor, Proceedings of APLAS 2004, 2nd Asian Symposium on Programming Lan- guages and Systems, volume 3302 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 296-310. Springer Verlag, 2004.
  5. R. Bruni. Tile Logic for Synchronized Rewriting of Concurrent Systems. PhD thesis, Com- puter Science Department, University of Pisa, 1999.
  6. R. Bruni, J.L. Fiadeiro, I. Lanese, A. Lopes, and U. Montanari. New insights on architectural connectors. In J.-J. Levy, E.W. Mayr, and J.C. Mitchell, editors, Proceedings of IFIP TCS 2004, 3rd IFIP International Conference on Theoretical Computer Science, IFIP Conference Proceedings, pages 367-379. Kluwer Academics, 2004.
  7. R. Bruni, F. Honsell, M. Lenisa, and M. Miculan. Comparing higher-order encodings in logical frameworks and tile logic. In U. Montanari, editor, Proceedings of TOSCA 2001, Final Workshop of the TOSCA Project, volume 62 of Elect. Notes in Th. Comput. Sci., 2001.
  8. R. Bruni and U. Montanari. Cartesian closed double categories, their lambda-notation, and the pi-calculus. In Proceedings of LICS'99, 14th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Com- puter Science, pages 246-265. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1999.
  9. L. Cardelli and A.D. Gordon. Mobile ambients. In M. Nivat, editor, Proceedings of FoS- SaCS'98, Foundations of Software Science and Computational Structures, volume 1378 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 140-155. Springer Verlag, 1998.
  10. K. Chandy and J. Misra. Parallel Program Design -A Foundation. Addison-Wesley, 1988.
  11. A. Corradini and F. Gadducci. An algebraic presentation of term graphs, via gs-monoidal categories. Applied Categorical Structures, 7:299-331, 1999.
  12. A. Corradini and U. Montanari. An algebraic semantics for structured transition systems and its application to logic programs. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 103:51-106, 1992.
  13. R. De Nicola, G.L. Ferrari, and R. Pugliese. KLAIM: a kernel language for agents interaction and mobility. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24(5):315-330, 1998.
  14. P. Degano and U. Montanari. A model for distributed systems based on graph rewriting. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 34(2):411-449, 1987.
  15. G.L. Ferrari and U. Montanari. Tile formats for located and mobile systems. Inform. and Comput., 156(1-2):173-235, 2000.
  16. G.L. Ferrari, U. Montanari, and E. Tuosto. A LTS semantics of ambients via graph syn- chronization with mobility. In A. Restivo, S. Ronchi Della Rocca, and L. Roversi, editors, Proceedings of ICTCS 2001, 7th Italian Conference on Theoretical Computer Science, vol- ume 2202 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 1-16. Springer Verlag, 2001.
  17. J.L. Fiadeiro and T. Maibaum. Categorical semantics of parallel program design. Science of Computer Programming, 28:111-138, 1997.
  18. F. Gadducci. Term graph rewriting for the π-calculus. In A. Ohori, editor, Proceedings of APLAS 2003, 1st Asian Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems, volume 2895 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 37-54. Springer Verlag, 2003.
  19. F. Gadducci and U. Montanari. The tile model. In G. Plotkin, C. Stirling, and M. Tofte, editors, Proof, Language and Interaction: Essays in Honour of Robin Milner, pages 133- 166. MIT Press, 2000.
  20. F. Gadducci and U. Montanari. A concurrent graph semantics for mobile ambients. In Pro- ceedings of MFPS 2001, 17th Conference on the Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics, volume 45 of Elect. Notes in Th. Comput. Sci. Elsevier Science, 2001.
  21. F. Gadducci and U. Montanari. Comparing logics for rewriting: Rewriting logic, action calculi and tile logic. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 285(2):319-358, 2002.
  22. P. Gardner. From process calculi to process frameworks. In C. Palamidessi, editor, Proceed- ing of CONCUR 2000, 11th International Conference on Concurrency Theory, volume 1877 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 69-88. Springer Verlag, 2000.
  23. J. Goguen. Categorical foundations for general systems theory. In F. Pichler and R. Trappl, editors, Advances in Cybernetics and Systems Research, pages 121-130. Transcripta Books, 1973.
  24. M. Hasegawa. Models of sharing graphs. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, Department of Computer Science, 1997.
  25. D. Hirsch, P. Inverardi, and U. Montanari. Reconfiguration of software architecture styles with name mobility. In A. Porto and G.-C. Roman, editors, Proceedings of Coordination 2000, 4th International Conference on Coordination Languages and Models,, volume 1906 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 148-163. Springer Verlag, 2000.
  26. D. Hirsch and U. Montanari. Synchronized hyperedge replacement with name mobility. In K.G. Larsen and M. Nielsen, editors, Proceedings of CONCUR 2001, 12th International Conference on Concurrency Theory, volume 2154 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 121-136. Springer Verlag, 2001.
  27. K. Honda and M. Tokoro. An object calculus for asynchronous communication. In P. Amer- ica, editor, Proceedings of ECOOP'91, European Conference on Object-Oriented Program- ming, volume 512 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 133-147. Springer Verlag, 1991.
  28. O.H. Jensen and R. Milner. Bigraphs and transitions. SIGPLAN Not., 38(1):38-49, 2003.
  29. O.H. Jensen and R. Milner. Bigraphs and mobile processes (revised). Technical Report TR580, Cambridge Computer Laboratory, 2004.
  30. B. König. A graph rewriting semantics for the polyadic π-calculus. In J.D.P. Rolim, A.Z. Broder, A. Corradini, R. Gorrieri, R. Heckel, J. Hromkovic, U. Vaccaro, and J.B. Wells, ed- itors, Proceedings of ICALP Workshops 2000: GT-VMT 2000, Satellite Workshop on Graph Transformation and Visual Modeling Techniques, volume 8 of Proceedings in Informatics, pages 451-458. Carleton Scientific, 2000.
  31. J. Lamping. An algorithm for optimal lambda calculus reduction. In Proceedings of POPL'90, 17th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 16-30. Association for Computing Machinery, 1990.
  32. I. Lanese and U. Montanari. A graphical fusion calculus. In F. Honsell, M. Lenisa, and M. Miculan, editors, Proceedings of CoMeta 2003, Final Workshop of the CoMeta Project, Elect. Notes in Th. Comput. Sci., 2003. To appear.
  33. I. Lanese and U. Montanari. Synchronization algebras with mobility for graph transforma- tions.
  34. In J. Rathke, editor, Proceedings of FGUC 2004, Satellite Workshop of CONCUR 2004 on Foundations of Global Ubiquitous Computing, Elect. Notes in Th. Comput. Sci., 2004. To appear.
  35. C. Laneve, J. Parrow, and B. Victor. Solo diagrams. In N. Kobayashi and B.C. Pierce, editors, Proceedings of TACS 2001, 4th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Software, volume 2215 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 127-144. Springer Verlag, 2001.
  36. C. Laneve and B. Victor. Solos in concert. Math. Struct. in Comput. Sci., 13(5):657-683, 2003.
  37. K.G. Larsen and L. Xinxin. Compositionality through an operational semantics of contexts. In M.S. Paterson, editor, Proceedings of ICALP'90, 17th International Colloquium on Au- tomata, Languages and Programming, volume 443 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 526-539. Springer Verlag, 1990.
  38. J.J. Leifer and R. Milner. Deriving bisimulation congruences for reactive systems. In C. Palamidessi, editor, Proceedings of CONCUR 2000, 11th International Conference on Concurrency Theory, volume 1877 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 243-258. Springer Verlag, 2000.
  39. J.-J. Lévy. Optimal reductions in the lambda-calculus. In J.P. Seldin and J.R. Hindley, editors, To H.B. Curry: Essays on Combinatory Logic, Lambda Calculus and Formalism, pages 159-191. Academic Press, 1980.
  40. J. Meseguer. Conditional rewriting logic as a unified model of concurrency. Theoret. Comput. Sci., 96:73-155, 1992.
  41. R. Milner. Communication and concurrency. Prenctice Hall, 1989.
  42. R. Milner. Pi-nets: A graphical formalism. In D. Sannella, editor, Proceedings of ESOP'94, European Symposium on Programming, volume 788 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 26-42. Springer Verlag, 1994.
  43. R. Milner. Bigraphical reactive systems. In K.G. Larsen and M. Nielsen, editors, Proceedings of CONCUR 2001, 12th International Conference on Concurrency Theory, volume 2154 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 16-35. Springer Verlag, 2001.
  44. R. Milner, J. Parrow, and J. Walker. A calculus of mobile processes, I and II. Inform. and Comput., 100(1):1-40,41-77, 1992.
  45. U. Montanari and M. Pistore. Concurrent semantics for the pi-calculus. In Proceedings of MFPS 1995, 11th Conference on the Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics, volume 1 of Elect. Notes in Th. Comput. Sci. Elsevier Science, 1995.
  46. J. Parrow. Interaction diagrams. Nordic Journal of Computing, 2(2):407-443, 1995.
  47. J. Parrow and B. Victor. The fusion calculus: Expressiveness and symmetry in mobile pro- cesses. In Proceedings of LICS'98, 13th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 176-185. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1998.
  48. G. Plotkin. A structural approach to operational semantics. Technical Report DAIMI FN-19, Aarhus University, Computer Science Department, 1981.
  49. D. Plump. Term graph rewriting. In H. Ehrig, G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors, Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, volume 2, pages 3-61. World Scientific, 1999.
  50. A. Rensink. Bisimilarity of open terms. Inform. and Comput., 156(1-2):345-385, 2000.
  51. D. Sangiorgi. Expressing Mobility in Process Algebras: First-Order and Higher-Order Paradigms. PhD thesis, LFCS, University of Edinburgh, 1993. CST-99-93 (also published as ECS-LFCS-93-266).
  52. P. Sewell. From rewrite rules to bisimulation congruences. In D. Sangiorgi and R. de Simone, editors, Proceedings of CONCUR'98, 9th International Conference on Concurrency Theory, volume 1466 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 269-284. Springer Verlag, 1998.
  53. G. Stefanescu. Interactive systems: from a natural language expression, to a mathematical concept. In H.C.M. de Swart, editor, Proceedings of RELMICS 2001, 6th International Work- shop on Relational Methods in Computer Science, volume 2561 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 197-211. Springer Verlag, 2001.
  54. G. Stefanescu. Interactive systems with registers and voices. Draft available at http:// www.comp.nus.edu.sg/˜gheorghe/papers/rvsystems.pdf, 2004.
  55. N. Yoshida. Graph notation for concurrent combinators. In T. Ito and A. Yonezawa, edi- tors, Proceedings of TPPP'94, International Workshop on Theory and Practice of Parallel Programming, volume 907 of Lect. Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 393-412. Springer Verlag, 1995.

Related papers

Summary 3: On Graph(ic) Encodings
Roberto Bruni

2005

This paper is an informal summary of different encoding techniques from process calculi and distributed formalisms to graphic frameworks. The survey includes the use of solo diagrams, term graphs, synchronized hyperedge replacement systems, bigraphs, tile models and interactive systems, all presented at the Dagstuhl Seminar 04241. The common theme of all techniques recalled here is having a graphic presentation that, at the same time, gives both an intuitive visual rendering (of processes, states, etc.) and a rigorous mathematical framework.

View PDFchevron_right
Syntax and semantics of graphs
Jorn W Janneck

2000

View PDFchevron_right
A graph-theoretic language extension for an interactive computer graphics environment
James Delgrande

Computers & Graphics, 1980

A programming language extension, AGILE, for the processing of graphs within an interactive computer graphics environment, is defined. The language is intended to be used for expressing and illustrating graph-theoretic algorithms and applications. However it does not deal with the actual drawing or display of graphs; rather one is able to access an existing general-purpose graphics package. The language then is intended to be used, in conjunction with a graphics package, as a tool for the production of more specialised graphics systems: the language allows one to naturally exploit the underlying graph structure found in a wide class of problems, while a graphics environment permits the elegant display of (and interaction with) such representations.

View PDFchevron_right
Electronic Communications of the EASST Volume 47 ( 2012 ) Proceedings of the 11 th International Workshop on Graph Transformation and Visual Modeling Techniques ( GTVMT 2012 ) Graph Passing in Graph Transformation
Amir Ghamarian

2012

Graph transformation works under the whole world assumption. Therefore, in realistic systems, both the individual graphs and the set of all such graphs can grow very large. In reactive formalisms such as process algebra, on the other hand, each system is split into smaller components which continually interact; the interactions pass information such as names or locations between components. The state spaces for the separate components are typically much smaller, and much efficiency can be gained by analysing system behaviour on this level. In this paper we present a framework for compositional graph transformation inspired by name-passing calculi, in which (knowledge about) subgraphs can be passed between components. Essentially, we define graph-passing (reactive) component rules and their composition into traditional (reductive) whole-world rules. This extends previous work in which a simpler form of composition was proposed. The main result is a soundness and completeness result f...

View PDFchevron_right
Visualization of Distributed Algorithms Based on Graph Relabelling Systems1
Mohamed Mosbah

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 2001

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Interactive Monitoring System
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved