Abstract
Encodings or the proof of their absence are the main way to
compare process calculi. To analyse the quality of encodings and to rule out
trivial or meaningless encodings, they are augmented with quality
criteria. There exists a bunch of different criteria and different variants
of criteria in order to reason in different settings. This leads to
incomparable results. Moreover it is not always clear whether the criteria
used to obtain a result in a particular setting do indeed fit to this
setting. We show how to formally reason about and compare encodability
criteria by mapping them on requirements on a relation between source and
target terms that is induced by the encoding function. In particular we
analyse the common criteria full abstraction, operational correspondence,
divergence reflection, success sensitiveness, and respect of barbs; e.g. we
analyse the exact nature of the simulation relation (coupled simulation
versus bisimulation) that is induced by different variants of operational
correspondence. This way we reduce the problem of analysing or comparing
encodability criteria to the better understood problem of comparing
relations on processes.
License
Topics
Session Encodability_Process_Calculi
- Relations
- ProcessCalculi
- SimulationRelations
- Encodings
- SourceTargetRelation
- SuccessSensitiveness
- DivergenceReflection
- OperationalCorrespondence
- FullAbstraction
- CombinedCriteria