1 / 36

Exploiting user-definable synchronizations in graph transformation

Exploiting user-definable synchronizations in graph transformation. Ivan Lanese Computer Science Department Univers ity of Bologna Italy. Roadmap. Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement The airport case study Parametric SHR Computing a transition step-by-step Conclusions. Roadmap.

dolph
Download Presentation

Exploiting user-definable synchronizations in graph transformation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Exploiting user-definable synchronizationsin graph transformation Ivan Lanese Computer Science Department University of Bologna Italy

  2. Roadmap • Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement • The airport case study • Parametric SHR • Computing a transition step-by-step • Conclusions

  3. Roadmap • Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement • The airport case study • Parametric SHR • Computing a transition step-by-step • Conclusions

  4. Graph transformation • Graphs used to model system structure • (Hyper)edges are components • Nodes are communication channels • Graph transformation model system evolution • Rules replace parts of the graph with new parts • Captures in an intuitive way reconfiguration

  5. The SHR approach • Traditional graph transformation (e.g., DPO) requires to match large subgraphs • Difficult to implement in a distributed setting • The SHR approach • Rules (productions) describe the behaviour of single edges • Productions applied locally • Synchronization to coordinate different productions

  6. Standard SHR presentation • Algebra to represent graphs • LTS-based semantics • Inference rules to derive transitions from productions • Apt for developing theory • Induction on the derivation, coinduction • Difficult to understand • A transition is a result of many steps of derivation • Heavy technicalities

  7. Our SHR presentation • Set-theoretical presentation of graphs • LTS-based semantics • Algorithm to derive the allowed transitions • Each step corresponds to an intuitive check • Choice of the productions, verification of the synchronization constraints, … • More easy to guess the resulting transitions • More easy to program

  8. at at R S L chk chk More on productions • Rewrite an edge into a graph preserving the interface • Many productions can be applied concurrently • Synchronization constraints must be satisfied • Mobility can change the interface

  9. Basics of synchronization & mobility • Productions can execute actions on attached nodes • Actions executed on each node at each step must be compatible • Actions can carry nodes as parameters • Parameters of synchronizing actions may be merged Synchronization Mobility

  10. Roadmap • Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement • The airport case study • Parametric SHR • Computing a transition step-by-step • Conclusions

  11. The airport case study • Taken from AGILE project on architectures for mobility • Models airplanes taking off and landing at airports and persons traveling using them • Modeled inside AGILE using • UML extended with mobility primitives • Synchronized variant of DPO • We concentrate on a small part of the case study

  12. inBo Our aim univ univ chk inPl inBo chk inPl

  13. at in newat at chk in Programming using productions (1) at:<ε,<>> in:<ack,<at>> at:<req,<newat>> chk: <breq,<in>> in:<ε,<>>

  14. newat chk at Programming using productions (2) at:<ε,<>> chk: <brd,<newat>> Idle productions always available

  15. Roadmap • Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement • The airport case study • Parametric SHR • Computing a transition step-by-step • Conclusions

  16. Parametric SHR • A member of SHR family • Synchronization and mobility patterns not fixed but user-definable • Specified using Synchronization Algebras with Mobility • Allows to use each time the most suitable synchronization primitives

  17. Synchronization Algebras with Mobility • Specify how actions synchronize • Two at the time, associativity and commutativity required • From Winskel’s synchronization algebras • Partial operator ● for action synchronization • Action ε for “not taking part to the synchronization” • Added • Arities of actions • Function from parameters of the synchronizing actions to parameters of the result • Set of final actions

  18. τ in out a a ε Milner SAM • Normal actions, coactions, τ, ε • in ● out = τ • a ● ε = a • Final actions: τ, ε

  19. out in out in in in Broadcast SAM • Normal actions, coactions,ε • in ● out = out • in ● in = in • ε●ε = ε • Final actions: out, ε

  20. And many more • SAMs can be defined for many synchronization policies • Mutual exclusion • Priority synchronization • … • SAMs can be combined • In the example: req and acq interacting using Milner synchronization and breq and brd interacting using broadcast

  21. Applying a SAM • SAMs used to synchronize tuples of actions ai carrying parameters pi • If synchronization is allowed we can compute • A resulting action c • A substitution σ • A tuple of parameters p

  22. Applying broadcast • Broadcast synchronization is allowed if • at most one action is “out” • if there is an ε, then all the actions are ε • The result is • ε if all actions are ε • “in” if all the actions are “in” (not allowed on bound nodes) • “out” otherwise • Substitution σ computed as mgu of equalities pi=pj for all i, j • Parameters p computed as piσ (any i can be chosen)

  23. Roadmap • Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement • The airport case study • Parametric SHR • Computing a transition step-by-step • Conclusions

  24. The algorithm (1) • One production is chosen for each edge • Idle production for passenger not checked in • Productions shown before for other edges • New nodes are local to productions • The actions executed on each node x are synchronized • Action cx, parameters px and substitution σx as results • If x is bound then cx must be final

  25. Synchronization in the example ε,<> univ ack,<univ> inBo ε,<> ε,<> req,<newat> ε,<> brd,<new1> breq,<inPl> chk ε,<> brd,<new2> inPl

  26. Synchronization in the example ε univ inBo τ univ/newat brd,<new1> breq,<inPl> chk ε brd,<new2> inPl

  27. Synchronization in the example ε univ inBo τ univ/newat breq,<inPl> chk ε inPl/new1,inPl/new2 inPl

  28. The algorithm (2) • Global substitution σ computed by • Merging the substitutions σx from single nodes • Final label contain • The triple <x, cx, pxσ> for each free x in the LHS • Final graph computed by • Merging the RHSs of the productions • Applying the global substitution σ • Hiding nodes unless free in the LHSs or occurring in the label • Deleting isolated nodes

  29. new1 new2 Result of the transition univ newat chk inBo inPl univ/newat, inPl/new1, inPl/new2

  30. Result of the transition univ chk inBo inPl univ/newat, inPl/new1, inPl/new2

  31. Result of the transition univ chk inBo inPl The label is <x,ε,<>>

  32. Result of the transition univ chk inBo inPl All nodes but univ are hidden

  33. Roadmap • Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement • The airport case study • Parametric SHR • Computing a transition step-by-step • Conclusions

  34. Conclusions • About SHR • Powerful graph transformation framework • Allows to relate local and global views of the system • About PSHR • Allows to simplify the specification of complex transformations • About this presentation of PSHR • Less suitable for developing theory • Hopefully more apt for designers/developers • The two views are (nearly) equivalent: the most suitable can be chosen at each time

  35. Future work • I have moved, so I’m not sure I will continue working on this • Some interesting things on SHR under development • Category of SAMs to compose and compare them • Applying SHR to QoS • Abstract semantics for SHR • One thing that is surely missing • Implementation of SHR

  36. End of talk Thanks Questions?

More Related