Source author record

Maria Chiara Meo

Maria Chiara Meo appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Logic in Computer Science Programming Languages Artificial Intelligence Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing Software Engineering

Catalog footprint

What is connected

5works

5topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2016arXiv

Verification of Time-Aware Business Processes using Constrained Horn Clauses

We present a method for verifying properties of time-aware business processes, that is, business process where time constraints on the activities are explicitly taken into account. Business processes are specified using an extension of the Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) and durations are defined by constraints over integer numbers. The definition of the operational semantics is given by a set OpSem of constrained Horn clauses (CHCs). Our verification method consists of two steps. (Step 1) We specialize OpSem with respect to a given business process and a given temporal property to be verified, whereby getting a set of CHCs whose satisfiability is equivalent to the validity of the given property. (Step 2) We use state-of-the-art solvers for CHCs to check the satisfiability of such sets of clauses. We have implemented our verification method using the VeriMAP transformation system, and the Eldarica and Z3 solvers for CHCs.

preprint2014arXiv

Timed Soft Concurrent Constraint Programs: An Interleaved and a Parallel Approach

We propose a timed and soft extension of Concurrent Constraint Programming. The time extension is based on the hypothesis of bounded asynchrony: the computation takes a bounded period of time and is measured by a discrete global clock. Action prefixing is then considered as the syntactic marker which distinguishes a time instant from the next one. Supported by soft constraints instead of crisp ones, tell and ask agents are now equipped with a preference (or consistency) threshold which is used to determine their success or suspension. In the paper we provide a language to describe the agents behavior, together with its operational and denotational semantics, for which we also prove the compositionality and correctness properties. After presenting a semantics using maximal parallelism of actions, we also describe a version for their interleaving on a single processor (with maximal parallelism for time elapsing). Coordinating agents that need to take decisions both on preference values and time events may benefit from this language. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

preprint2013arXiv

Unfolding for CHR programs

Program transformation is an appealing technique which allows to improve run-time efficiency, space-consumption, and more generally to optimize a given program. Essentially, it consists of a sequence of syntactic program manipulations which preserves some kind of semantic equivalence. Unfolding is one of the basic operations which is used by most program transformation systems and which consists in the replacement of a procedure call by its definition. While there is a large body of literature on transformation and unfolding of sequential programs, very few papers have addressed this issue for concurrent languages. This paper defines an unfolding system for CHR programs. We define an unfolding rule, show its correctness and discuss some conditions which can be used to delete an unfolded rule while preserving the program meaning. We also prove that, under some suitable conditions, confluence and termination are preserved by the above transformation. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP)

preprint2011arXiv

On the Expressive Power of Multiple Heads in CHR

Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) is a committed-choice declarative language which has been originally designed for writing constraint solvers and which is nowadays a general purpose language. CHR programs consist of multi-headed guarded rules which allow to rewrite constraints into simpler ones until a solved form is reached. Many empirical evidences suggest that multiple heads augment the expressive power of the language, however no formal result in this direction has been proved, so far. In the first part of this paper we analyze the Turing completeness of CHR with respect to the underneath constraint theory. We prove that if the constraint theory is powerful enough then restricting to single head rules does not affect the Turing completeness of the language. On the other hand, differently from the case of the multi-headed language, the single head CHR language is not Turing powerful when the underlying signature (for the constraint theory) does not contain function symbols. In the second part we prove that, no matter which constraint theory is considered, under some reasonable assumptions it is not possible to encode the CHR language (with multi-headed rules) into a single headed language while preserving the semantics of the programs. We also show that, under some stronger assumptions, considering an increasing number of atoms in the head of a rule augments the expressive power of the language. These results provide a formal proof for the claim that multiple heads augment the expressive power of the CHR language.

preprint2010arXiv

Decidability properties for fragments of CHR

We study the decidability of termination for two CHR dialects which, similarly to the Datalog like languages, are defined by using a signature which does not allow function symbols (of arity >0). Both languages allow the use of the = built-in in the body of rules, thus are built on a host language that supports unification. However each imposes one further restriction. The first CHR dialect allows only range-restricted rules, that is, it does not allow the use of variables in the body or in the guard of a rule if they do not appear in the head. We show that the existence of an infinite computation is decidable for this dialect. The second dialect instead limits the number of atoms in the head of rules to one. We prove that in this case, the existence of a terminating computation is decidable. These results show that both dialects are strictly less expressive than Turing Machines. It is worth noting that the language (without function symbols) without these restrictions is as expressive as Turing Machines.