# Difference between revisions of "Behavioral Abstraction is Hiding Information"

From FSL

Line 1: | Line 1: | ||

− | This work has been published in a journal paper (J. of TCS) and in a workshop proceedings (CMCS'03). The journal version is an improved version of the workshop | + | This work has been published in a journal paper (J. of TCS) and in a workshop proceedings (CMCS'03). The journal version is an improved version of the one that appeared in the workshop proceedings. |

== J. of TCS == | == J. of TCS == |

## Revision as of 22:55, 25 August 2006

This work has been published in a journal paper (J. of TCS) and in a workshop proceedings (CMCS'03). The journal version is an improved version of the one that appeared in the workshop proceedings.

## J. of TCS

**Behavioral Abstraction is Hiding Information**- Grigore Rosu
, Volume 327(1-2), pp 197-221. 2004**J. of TCS**

*Abstract.*We show that for any behavioral -specification there is an ordinary algebraic specification over a larger signature, such that a model behaviorally satisfies iff it satisfies, in the ordinary sense, the -theorems of . The idea is to add machinery for contexts and experiments (sorts, operations and equations), use it, and then hide it. We develop a procedure, called*unhiding*, which takes a finite and produces a finite . The practical aspect of this procedure is that one can use any standard equational inductive theorem prover to derive behavioral theorems, even if neither equational reasoning nor induction is sound for behavioral satisfaction.

## CMCS'05

**Inductive Behavioral Proofs by Unhiding**- Grigore Rosu
, ENTCS 82(1). 2003**CMCS'03**

*Abstract.*We show that for any behavioral -specification there is an ordinary algebraic specification over a larger signature, such that a model behaviorally satisfies iff it satisfies, in the ordinary sense, the -theorems of . The idea is to add machinery for contexts and experiments (sorts, operations and equations), use it, and then hide it. We develop a procedure, called*unhiding*, which takes a finite and produces a finite . The practical aspect of this procedure is that one can use any standard equational inductive theorem prover to derive behavioral theorems, even if neither equational reasoning nor induction is sound for behavioral satisfaction.