A behavioral type system and its application in Ptolemy II

Lee, Edward A.; Xiong, Yan

doi:10.1007/s00165-004-0043-8

Cited by 60 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Behavioral Types. Lee and Xiong [14] used interface automata to formulate behavioral type signatures for several directors in Ptolemy II [19]. In their paper, several examples illustrate the interactions between a producer and consumer that exchange tokens, mediated by different directors.…”

Section: Behavioral Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Interface Theory for the Internet of Things

Lohstroh

Lee

2015

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper uses interface automata to develop an interface theory for a component architecture for Internet of Things (IoT) applications. Specifically, it examines an architecture for IoT applications where so-called "accessors" provide an actor-oriented proxy for devices ("things") and services. Following the principles of actor models, an accessor reacts to input stimuli and produces outputs that can stimulate reactions in other accessors or actors. The paper focuses on a specialized form of actor models where inputs and outputs to accessors and actors are time-stamped events, enabling timing-sensitive IoT applications. The interaction between accessors and actors via time-stamped events forms a "horizontal contract," formalized in this paper as an interface automaton. The interaction between an accessor and the thing or service for which it is a proxy is a "vertical contract," also formalized as an interface automaton. Following common practice in network programming, our vertical contract uses an asynchronous atomic callback (AAC) pattern. The formal composition of these interface automata allows us to reason about the combination of a timed actor model and the AAC pattern, enabling careful evaluation of design choices for IoT systems.

show abstract

Section: Behavioral Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Interface Theory for the Internet of Things

Lohstroh

Lee

2015

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have adapted such type systems to capture domain-specific ontology information, checking for correct usage and correct interpretation of shared data [38]. And we have shown how to check for compatibility of protocols in compositions [35] and to synthesize interface adapters for separately defined components [49].…”

Section: Models Of Computationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Component-based design for the future

Lee

Sangiovanni‐Vincentelli

2011

2011 Design, Automation &Amp; Test in Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The asynchronous, actionbased interface theories of [6] are implemented as part of the Ptolemy toolset [8]. The tool Chic implements synchronous, variable-based interface theories closely modeled after [7].…”

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ticc: A Tool for Interface Compatibility and Composition

Adler

Alfaro

Silva

et al. 2006

Computer Aided Verification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present the tool Ticc (Tool for Interface Compatibility and Composition). In Ticc, a component interface describes both the behavior of a component, and the component's assumptions on the environment's behavior. Ticc can check the compatibility of such interfaces, and analyze their emergent behavior, via a symbolic implementation of game-theoretic algorithms. OverviewOpen systems are systems whose behavior is jointly determined by their internal structure, and by the inputs that they receive from their environment. In previous work, it has been argued that games constitute a natural model for open systems [1,6,7,4,2]. We use games to represent the interaction between the behavior originating within a component, and the behavior originating from the component's environment. In particular, we model components as Input-Output games: the moves of Input represent the behavior the component can accept from the environment, while the moves of Output represent the behavior the component can generate.Unlike component models based on transition systems, models based on games provide a notion of compatibility [6,7,4]. When two components P and Q are composed, we can check whether the output behavior of P satisfies the input requirements of Q, and vice-versa. However, we do not define P and Q to be compatible only if their input requirements are always satisfied. Rather, we recognize that the output behavior of P and Q can still be influenced by their residual interaction with the environment (unless the composition of P and Q is closed). Thus, we define P and Q to be compatible if there is some environment under which their input assumptions are mutually satisfied, and we associate with their composition P Q the weakest (most general) assumptions about the environment that guarantee mutual compatibility. In game-theoretic terms, P

show abstract

A behavioral type system and its application in Ptolemy II

Cited by 60 publications

References 32 publications

An Interface Theory for the Internet of Things

An Interface Theory for the Internet of Things

Component-based design for the future

Ticc: A Tool for Interface Compatibility and Composition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About