A calculus of broadcasting systems

  • K. V. S. Prasad
CAAP Colloquium On Trees In Algebra And Programming
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 493)


Local area networks (LANs) and everyday speech inspire a model of communication by unbuffered broadcast. Computation proceeds by a sequence of messages, each transmitted by one agent and received by zero or more others. Transmission is autonomous, but reception is not. Each message is received instantaneously by all agents except the transmitter, but is read only by those who were monitoring it at the time; others discard it. As in CCS, agents learn about the environment only through the messages they read. Programming such a system is hard because we have to ensure that messages are read.

Testing resembles a viva-voce examination. Observation, restriction and hidden actions differ from their CCS counterparts, as does testing equivalence.

We capture this model in a Calculus of Broadcasting Systems (CBS). We use transition systems with transmit, read and discard actions. Discards are self-loops, and only auxiliary. We have some results on strong bisimulation and testing, but much work remains to make CBS tractable.


Transition System Local Area Network Parallel Composition Synchronous Communication Silent Action 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. [Abr70]
    Norman Abramson. The Aloha system—another alternative for computer communications. In FJCC, pages 281–285, 1970.Google Scholar
  2. [BA90]
    M. Ben-Ari. Principles of Concurrent and Distributed Programming. Prentice-Hall, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. [BCG86]
    G. Berry, P. Couronné, and G. Gonthier. Synchronous programming of reactive systems: An introduction to ESTEREL. Technical Report 647, INRIA, 1986.Google Scholar
  4. [BIM88]
    Bard Bloom, Sorin Istrail, and Albert R. Meyer. Bisimulation can't be traced. In 15th Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. ACM, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. [BKT84]
    J. A. Bergstra, J. W. Klop, and J. V. Tucker. Process algebra with asynchronous communication mechanisms. In Seminar on Concurrency, pages 76–95. Carnegie-Mellon University, July 1984. Springer Verlag LNCS 197.Google Scholar
  6. [Bro88]
    Manfred Broy. Broadcasting buffering communication. Comput. Lang., 13(1):31–47, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. [CM88]
    K. Mani Chandy and Jayadev Misra. Parallel Program Design—A Foundation. Addison-Wesley, 1988.Google Scholar
  8. [CNL89]
    S. T. Chanson, G. W. Neufeld, and L. Liang. A bibliography on multicast and group communication. Operating Systems Review, 23(4), October 1989.Google Scholar
  9. [dNH84]
    Rocco de Nicola and Matthew Hennessy. Testing equivalences for processes. Theoretical Computer Science, 34:83, 1984.Google Scholar
  10. [Geh84]
    Narain Gehani. Broadcasting sequential processes. IEEE Trans. on Software Engg., 10(4):343, July 1984.Google Scholar
  11. [Gro90]
    J.F. Groote. Transition system specifications with negative premises. In CONCUR '90, 1990. Springer Verlag LNCS 458.Google Scholar
  12. [Hen88]
    Matthew Hennessy. Algebraic Theory of Processes. MIT Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  13. [Hen90]
    Matthew Hennessy. CSP with value-passing. Technical Report HPL-ISC-TM-90-025, Hewlett Packard Ltd., 1990.Google Scholar
  14. [HI89]
    Matthew Hennessy and Anna Ingolfsdottir. A theory of communicating processes with value-passing. Technical Report 3/89, University of Sussex, 1989. Also presented at ICALP 90.Google Scholar
  15. [Hoa78]
    C. A. R. Hoare. Communicating sequential processes. Communications of the ACM, 21(8):666–677, August 1978.Google Scholar
  16. [Hoa85]
    C. A. R. Hoare. Communicating Sequential Processes. Prentice Hall, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. [JJH90]
    He Jifeng, Mark Josephs, and C.A.R. Hoare. A theory of synchrony and asynchrony. Technical report, Programming Research Group, Oxford University Computing Laboratory, January 1990.Google Scholar
  18. [Jon90]
    Bengt Jonsson. A hierarchy of compositional models of I/O automata. Technical report, Swedish Institute of Computer Science, 1990.Google Scholar
  19. [JU90]
    Mark Josephs and Jan Udding. Delay-insensitive circuits: an algebraic approach to their design. In CONCUR '90, 1990. Springer Verlag LNCS 458.Google Scholar
  20. [MB76]
    R. M. Metcalfe and D. R. Boggs. Ethernet: Distributed packet switching for local computer networks. Communications of the ACM, 19(7), July 1976.Google Scholar
  21. [Mil80]
    Robin Milner. A Calculus of Communicating Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 1980.Google Scholar
  22. [Mil89]
    Robin Milner. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, 1989.Google Scholar
  23. [Pnu85]
    Amir Pnueli. Linear and branching structures in the semantics and logics of reactive systems. In Springer Verlag LNCS 194. ICALP, 1985.Google Scholar
  24. [SK88]
    M. Sloman and J. Kramer. Distributed Systems and Computer Networks. Prentice Hall, 1988.Google Scholar
  25. [SNP87]
    R. K. Shyamasundar, K. T. Narayana, and T. Pitassi. Semantics for nondeterministic asynchronous broadcast networks. Technical report, Pennsylvania State Univ., March 1987.Google Scholar
  26. [VG89]
    Frits Vaandrager and Jan Groote. Structured operational semantics and bisimulation as a congruence. In Springer Verlag LNCS 372, pages 423–438. ICALP, 1989.Google Scholar
  27. [Win84]
    Glynn Winskel. Synchronization trees. Theoretical Computer Science, 34:33–82, 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. V. S. Prasad
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer SciencesChalmers University of TechnologyGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations