Innocent strategies as presheaves and interactive equivalences for CCS

• Published in: Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science
• Main Authors: Hirschowitz, Tom, Pous, Damien
• Other Authors: Laboratoire de Mathématiques (LAMA), Université Savoie Mont Blanc (USMB Université de Savoie Université de Chambéry )-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), System architecture for reflective distributed computing environments (SARDES), Inria Grenoble - Rhône-Alpes, Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (Inria)-Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (Inria)-Laboratoire d'Informatique de Grenoble (LIG), Université Pierre Mendès France - Grenoble 2 (UPMF)-Université Joseph Fourier - Grenoble 1 (UJF)-Institut polytechnique de Grenoble - Grenoble Institute of Technology (Grenoble INP )-Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble (INPG)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université Pierre Mendès France - Grenoble 2 (UPMF)-Université Joseph Fourier - Grenoble 1 (UJF)-Institut polytechnique de Grenoble - Grenoble Institute of Technology (Grenoble INP )-Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble (INPG)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)
• Format: Conference Object
• Language: English
• Published: HAL CCSD 2011
• Subjects: [INFO.INFO-LO]Computer Science [cs]/Logic in Computer Science [cs.LO]; Iceland
• Online Access: https://hal.science/hal-00616648; https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.59.2

In Proceedings ICE 2011, arXiv:1108.0144 International audience Seeking a general framework for reasoning about and comparing programming languages, we derive a new view of Milner's CCS. We construct a category E of plays, and a subcategory V of views. We argue that presheaves on V adequately represent innocent strategies, in the sense of game semantics. We then equip innocent strategies with a simple notion of interaction. This results in an interpretation of CCS. Based on this, we propose a notion of interactive equivalence for innocent strategies, which is close in spirit to Beffara's interpretation of testing equivalences in concurrency theory. In this framework we prove that the analogues of fair and must testing equivalences coincide, while they differ in the standard setting.