๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal
Decidability and Complexity for Quiescent Consistency and its Variations
November 26, 2015 ยท The Ethereal ยท ๐ Information and Computation
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Brijesh Dongol, Robert M. Hierons
arXiv ID
1511.08447
Category
cs.LO: Logic in CS
Cross-listed
cs.DC,
cs.DS,
cs.FL
Citations
1
Venue
Information and Computation
Last Checked
5 months ago
Abstract
Quiescent consistency is a notion of correctness for a concurrent object that gives meaning to the object's behaviours in quiescent states, i.e., states in which none of the object's operations are being executed. Correctness of an implementation object is defined in terms of a corresponding abstract specification. This gives rise to two important verification questions: membership (checking whether a behaviour of the implementation is allowed by the specification) and correctness (checking whether all behaviours of the implementation are allowed by the specification). In this paper, we show that the membership problem for quiescent consistency is NP-complete and that the correctness problem is decidable, but coNP-hard and in EXPSPACE. For both problems, we consider restricted versions of quiescent consistency by assuming an upper limit on the number of events between two quiescent points. Here, we show that the membership problem is in PTIME, whereas correctness is in PSPACE. Quiescent consistency does not guarantee sequential consistency, i.e., it allows operation calls by the same process to be reordered when mapping to an abstract specification. Therefore, we also consider quiescent sequential consistency, which strengthens quiescent consistency with an additional sequential consistency condition. We show that the unrestricted versions of membership and correctness are NP-complete and undecidable, respectively. When by placing a limit on the number of events between two quiescent points, membership is in PTIME, while correctness is in PSPACE. Finally, we consider a version of quiescent sequential consistency that places an upper limit on the number of processes for every run of the implementation, and show that the membership problem for quiescent sequential consistency with this restriction is in PTIME.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
๐ Similar Papers
In the same crypt โ Logic in CS
๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal
Safe Reinforcement Learning via Shielding
๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal
Formal Verification of Piece-Wise Linear Feed-Forward Neural Networks
๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal
Heterogeneous substitution systems revisited
๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal
Omega-Regular Objectives in Model-Free Reinforcement Learning
๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal