Advertisement

On the Relative Expressive Power of Ambient-Based Calculi

  • Daniele Gorla
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5474)

Abstract

Nowadays, some of the most successful models for global computers are defined as ambient-based calculi; among them, the mainstream models are Mobile, Safe and Boxed Ambients. In this paper, we comparatively analyze them and most of their variants by comparing every variant against the language it comes from. In particular, we discuss and compare: objective moves in Mobile Ambients; passwords and a different semantics for the out primitive in Safe Ambients; different communication and mobility primitives in Boxed Ambients. By establishing the possibility/impossibility of encoding one language in another one, we relate the three main models and, for each of their variant, we discover whether it enhances the original language or actually yields a different formalism.

Keywords

Target Language Objective Move Expressive Power Parallel Composition Leader Election 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bugliesi, M., Castagna, G., Crafa, S.: Access control for mobile agents: the calculus of Boxed Ambients. Trans. on Progr. Lang. and Syst. 26(1), 57–124 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bugliesi, M., Crafa, S., Merro, M., Sassone, V.: Communication and mobility control in Boxed Ambients. Information and Computation 202(1), 39–86 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cardelli, L., Ghelli, G., Gordon, A.D.: Types for the Ambient Calculus. Information and Computation 177(2), 160–194 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cardelli, L., Gordon, A.D.: Mobile ambients. Theoretical Computer Science 240(1), 177–213 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Nicola, R., Hennessy, M.: Testing equivalence for processes. Theoretical Computer Science 34, 83–133 (1984)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gorla, D.: Comparing calculi for mobility via their relative expressive power. Tech. Rep. 09/2006, Dip. di Informatica, Università di Roma La SapienzaGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gorla, D.: Towards a unified approach to encodability and separation results for process calculi. In: van Breugel, F., Chechik, M. (eds.) CONCUR 2008. LNCS, vol. 5201, pp. 492–507. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kobayashi, N.: A partially deadlock-free typed process calculus. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 20(2), 436–482 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Levi, F.: A typed encoding of boxed into safe ambients. Acta Informatica 42(6), 429–500 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Levi, F., Sangiorgi, D.: Mobile safe ambients. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 25(1), 1–69 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Merro, M., Hennessy, M.: A bisimulation-based semantic theory of Safe Ambients. ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems 28(2), 290–330 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Merro, M., Sassone, V.: Typing and subtyping mobility in boxed ambients. In: Brim, L., Jančar, P., Křetínský, M., Kucera, A. (eds.) CONCUR 2002. LNCS, vol. 2421, pp. 304–320. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Milner, R., Sangiorgi, D.: Barbed bisimulation. In: Kuich, W. (ed.) ICALP 1992. LNCS, vol. 623, pp. 685–695. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Palamidessi, C.: Comparing the expressive power of the synchronous and the asynchronous π-calculi. Mathem. Structures in Computer Science 13(5), 685–719 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Phillips, I., Vigliotti, M.: On reduction semantics for the push and pull ambient calculus. In: IFIP Conf. on Theoretical Comp. Sci., pp. 550–562. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Phillips, I., Vigliotti, M.: Electoral systems in ambient calculi. In: Walukiewicz, I. (ed.) FOSSACS 2004. LNCS, vol. 2987, pp. 408–422. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Phillips, I., Vigliotti, M.: Leader election in rings of ambient processes. Theoretical Computer Science 356(3), 468–494 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rathke, J., Sassone, V., Sobocinski, P.: Semantic barbs and biorthogonality. In: Seidl, H. (ed.) FOSSACS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4423, pp. 302–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniele Gorla
    • 1
  1. 1.Dip. di InformaticaUniv. di Roma “La Sapienza”Italy

Personalised recommendations