Unifying Reactive Languages Sample Clauses

Unifying Reactive Languages. ‌ NSRD healthy predicates encompass a number of existing languages, notably Circus and CML, and thus acts as a unifying layer for stateful reactive contracts. We will show that these UTP theories are all subsets of NSRD, and thus all the laws we have proved so far are applicable. This section thus serves to demonstrate the breadth of application of our UTP theory. We first consider CSP and Circus. In addition to the reactive design healthiness condi- tions, CSP1 and CSP2, the UTP CSP semantics adds CSP3 and CSP4. Definition A.4 (CSP Healthiness Conditions). CSP3(P) ¾ SKIP ; P CSP4(P) ¾ P ; SKIP The operator SKIP is equivalent to the Skip operator, but without state variables as CSP does not have these. CSP can be obtained by simply setting the state-space type Σ to a xxxxxxxxx set, which effectively removes state. In this case, R3h degenerates to R3, and thus Rs degenerates to X. Xxxxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxxx [9] proved that SKIP is equivalent to the reactive design R(true € trj = tr ∧ waitj), which in turn is equivalent to [ truer |- false | tt = () ]. We can then prove the following theorem. Theorem A.11 (CSP processes are NSRD healthy). If P is R and CSP1-CSP4 healthy, then P is NSRD healthy − − Proof. Since SRD is equivalent to R CSP1 CSP2 is suffices to show that P is RD3 healthy. From CSP4 we know that P = P ; SKIP. Moreover, we know that SKIP is RD3 since it satisfies the form given in Theorem A.3.2: the precondition is clearly RC1, and the pericondition does not mention stj. Consequently, SKIP ; IIR = SKIP, and thus by associativity of ; it follows that P is NSRD. Circus actions are similar to CSP processes, but have slightly different healthiness condi- tions that do account for state variables. Effectively, they require that the Circus action Skip is a left and right unit. Then, following a similar proof to Theorem A.11, we can show that Circus actions are indeed NSRD healthy. Circus additionally has the healthi- ness condition C3 [40] that mandates that the precondition of a reactive design can only contain undashed variables. Though true for Circus processes, this is over-restrictive and prevents assumptions with trace behaviour in reactive contracts. Thus our model is both unifying and more general, in that we only mandate the the precondition is RC1. We next show that our model also encompasses CML, a formal discrete time modelling language for systems of systems. Sequential CML actions are characterised by six health- iness conditions that we enum...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Unifying Reactive Languages

  • Contract Language The following language shall be included in contracts for City projects between the Consultant and any Subcontractors, vendors, and suppliers: Contractor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, gender expression, gender identity, religion, national origin, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, or disability in the solicitation, selection, hiring, or treatment of subcontractors, vendors, or suppliers. Consultant shall provide equal opportunity for Subcontractors to participate in opportunities. Consultant understands and agrees that violation of this clause shall be considered a material breach of the contract and may result in contract termination, debarment, or other sanctions.

  • Languages 20.1 The Proclamation of Sale, these conditions of sale and the Memorandum may have been translated and published in different forms and languages. In the event of any discrepancy, misstatement, omission or error appearing in the various forms or languages, this English version shall prevail.

  • Step 3 – Contract Language Disputes (a) If a grievance concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement, other than a grievance alleging that a disciplinary action (reduction in base pay, demotion, involuntary transfer of more than 50 miles by highway, suspension, or dismissal) was taken without cause, is not resolved at Step 2, the grievant or designated representative may appeal the grievance by submitting it to the Office Manager for the Office of the General Counsel of the Department of Management Services, 0000 Xxxxxxxxx Xxx, Xxxxx 000, Xxxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, 00000-0950, or by email to: Xxxx0Xxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx within 15 days following receipt of the decision at Step 2. The grievance shall include a copy of the grievance forms submitted at Steps 1 and 2, together with all written responses and documents in support of the grievance. When the grievance is eligible for initiation at Step 3, the grievance shall be filed on the grievance form contained in Appendix B of this Contract, setting forth specifically the facts on which the grievance is based, the specific provision(s) of the Contract allegedly violated, and the relief requested.

  • Suggested Language The following provides a sample contract clause: Compliance with the Xxxxx-Xxxxx Act.

  • English Language Learners The Charter School shall comply with all applicable federal laws and regulations relating to the provision of educational services to English Language Learners.

  • French Language 3.3.2. Spanish Language

  • Sample Language The following provides a sample contract clause: Compliance with the Xxxxxxxx “Anti-Kickback” Act.

  • Working language The working language of the partnership shall be English.

  • Mandate Letter language The Funder will receive a Mandate Letter from the Ministry annually. Each Mandate Letter articulates areas of focus for the Funder, and the Ministry’s expectation that the Funder and health service providers it funds will collaborate to advance these areas of focus. To assist the HSP in its collaborative efforts with the Funder, the Funder will share each relevant Mandate Letter with the HSP. The Funder may also add local obligations to Schedule D as appropriate to further advance any priorities set put in a Mandate Letter.

  • Technical Proposal The technical proposal may be presented in free format. It shall not exceed ten pages, not counting the CVs. It shall respect the following page limit and structure: • Technical methodology (max. 7 pages) • Quality management (max. 1 page) • Project management (max. 1 page) • Resource management (proposal (max. 1 page) + CVs of experts)

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.