This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

# POWER DOMAINS AND PREDICATE TRANSFORMERS: A TOPOLOGICAL VIEW M.B.

Smyth Department of Computer Science University of Edinburgh Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, Scotland

Abstract The broad theme of the paper is that topological concepts are basic to computer science. Such concepts as "specifications", "predicate transformer", and "nondeterThe

minism" can be greatly illuminated by being formulated in topological terms. specific tasks we undertake ace: domain constructions;

to provide a more adequate framework for power-

and to show that the connection between (DiJkstra's) weakest

preconditions and the Smyth powerdomain, established by Plotkin for the case of flat domains, actually holds in full generality.

The broad theme of this paper is that topological concepts are basic to computer science. benefits. The recognition of this relationship brings both conceptual and technical Such concepts a s " s p e c i f i c a t i o n " , "predicate transformer", and "nondeterThe

minism" can be greatly illuminated by being formulated in topological terms.

topological formulation enables a more adequate technical treatment to be given, by drawing on a well-established body of mathematical knowledge. One main area of application is that of powerdomain theory. of [15], We show that the ideas

[20] are in perfect harmony with topological treatments of multifunctions One

and spaces of subsets (or "hyperspaees") going back at least to Vietoris [22].

obstacle to perceiving this has been that the mathematicians have, for the most part, been interested only in Hausdorff spaces. We propose (Definition 5) a finitary notion

of "power space" which includes the existing (finitary) powerdomain and hyperspace constructs as special cases, and which is at the same time more direct and accessible (given a minimal acquaintance with topology) than the versions of [15], [20]. But,

for reasons of space, we do not develop the power space theory here and, in particular, we consider the possibility of extending it to cover infinitary powerdomains (as in [I], [17]) only in passing. Instead, we consider Dijkstra's predicate transformers.

Here, the topological interpretation is even more direct and compelling than in the case of the power domains. It immediately shows us how to generalize the weakest

precondition semantics, and its connection with the upper (or Smyth) powerdomain (cf. Plotkin [16]), to arbitrary domains. (The treatment in [6] and [16] is, of The removal of the restriction to

course, restricted to flat, or discrete, domains.)

flat domains should permit the development of more adequate programming logics. The key to the work of generalization presented here, as to much recent mathematical work that seeks to escape the limitations of the traditional insistence on Hausdorff

) . while the greatest is ~ S Notation. A topology on a set S is a collection of subsets of S that is closed under finite intersection and arbitrary union. n o n T I) spaces. We are mainly interested in the case that P is an ~-algebraic cpo (there are countably many finite elements. that ~ ~ . Similarly for +x. such as: (2) Alexandroff topology of a poset. especially (3) Scott topology of a poset (usually a cpo) (P. is the topology with subbase UT. for any directed set Y c P. we write the lub VT. along with more standard topological material. +x for {ylx<y} +X for U{+xlx ~ X}. (complete) lattice of open sets of the space X. A set 0 c P is open iff 0 and is +-closed and. unless X is Hausdorff. form a complete lattice: for T a set of topologies. consisting of the +-closed sets. and related concepts ("pointless topology"). (In Bourbaki. X ~ P. These. S is a subset ~ c ~ s u c h a subset ~ c that every open set is the union that every open set is the A subbase of ~ i s ~such ~is union of finite intersections of elements o f ~ . then ~ v ~ A subset Q of a space x is compact provided that any family of open sets whose union contains X (so that the family covers X) has a finite subfamily which covers X.663 separation. if VY ~ 0 then some element of Y is in 0. we have the specialization preorder ~ o n S. In this sub-section we recall some rudimentary topological notions whichwill be used repeatedly in the sequel. i. For a poset (P. We (i) Euclidean space R n. but this convention seems unnecessary. A) Topology Preliminaries. Q is allowed to be only quasi-compact under these circumstances. x E P.S}. any collection ~ c ~ then the least topology such topology S may be taken as the subbase of a (unique) The topologies on a set S. ordered by inclusion. defined by: it has as base the sets +a. For any topology ~ o n x ~Y S. Examples. is the use of sober spaces. x 6 0 -> y ~ 0. Here the Scott topology is very simply described: finite. are more interested in non-Hausdorff (indeed.<). frames. A set S together with a topology ~ o n S is a We also the elements of ~ are the open sets of the space. +-closed. and each element is the sup of a chain of finite elements).~' are topologies on S. X is +-closed if X = +X. The least topology on S (the discrete topology).~). a ~df V0 ~ ~ . with base the open rational intervals. are briefly introduced in Section i. use the notation ~(X) for the A base of the topology ~ o n of elements of ~. is the trivial topology {~. topological space ( S . +X. = !~ ~ ~'" If ~. ~ .

In v i e w of our i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of p r o p e r t i e s w i t h o p e n sets. then f: D -> D' is continuous w. the idea of a c o m p u t a b l e p r o p e r t y is simply this: we have a u n i f o r m p r o c e d u r e that. (computable) p • T a k i n g a p r e d i c a t e on a space X to be a c o n t i n u o u s m a p f r o m X into the B o o l e a n /tt. tells us w i t h i n a finite time that Of course. decidability. Fact. A n idea that w i l l surface from time to time.e. w h e r e D i s i s o m o r p h i s m b e t w e e n ~(X) the t w o . is that a s p e c i f i c a t i o n of an o b j e c t or countable) (say. the two notions of c o m p u t a b l e p r o p e r t y are equivalent. g i v e n [a code for) an e l e m e n t x. in that there should be a countable base of open sets.664 -i If X. (0) of e a c h set 0 open in Y is open in X is closed). that in A The t h e o r e m of Rice et al the case of the domain ~m. 2).s e t Kuratowski [13]).D' are cpo's.76) shows. Computability/continuity. the Scott t o p o l o g i e s of D. but it will have the (see The n o t i o n of a compact set is a little h a r d e r to motivate: significance for us of a "finitarily specifiable" set or. But one r e q u i r e m e n t We are not g o i n g to stress "effectiveness" in this paper.r. Rogers [19]). (To make more of a t h e o r e m o u t of this: and [X ->~)]. if the inverse of each closed set If D. (we will e l a b o r a t e on (for a c o m p u t a t i o n a l l y r e a s o n a b l e space) w h i c h we m a k e use of is C o m p u t a b i l i t y concepts will. a m a p f: X -> Y is continuous if the inverse f (equivalently. We think of a t o p o l o g i c a l space d e f i n e d on the as a "data type". B) C o m p u t a t i o n a l significance of t o p o l o g i c a l ideas. (Plotkin [18]. this is just the idea of semi- P(x) holds. this m e a n s that w h a t is s p e c i f i e d is always a countable i n t e r s e c t i o n of o p e n sets. in o t h e r w o r d s a ~ 6 .p o i n t cpo.9) g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of the R i c e t h e o r e m shows that the equiv- alence holds in any "effectively given" algebraic cpo. Intuitively. of a set of results attainable b y a b o u n d e d l y n o n . in effect.) A n o t h e r r e a s o n a b l e n o t i o n of c o m p u t a b l e p r o p e r t y w o u l d be that in w h i c h P is c o n s i d e r e d computable iff the set of (codes. • we have (trivially) that a subset S of X is open iff S i s p-l(tt) there is an order- cpo B = f f ~ for some p r e d i c a t e p. .D' iff f preserves lubs of d i r e c t e d sits. 7. a l t h o u g h we are not going to d e v e l o p it in detail here. a l g e b r a i c cpo D. alternatively. w i t h the open sets as the type.Y are (topological) spaces. ~ fin(S) We use B D for the basis (set of finite elements) ~ of an for the for the c o l l e c t i o n of finite subsets of S. w h e n e v e r that is true.d e t e r m i n i s t i c p r o c e s s these p o i n t s in Sec. c a t e g o r y of topological spaces w i t h c o n t i n u o u s functions as morphisms. class. (Rogers p. or indices) of (computable) elements s a t i s f y i n g P can be e f f e c t i v e l y e n u m e r a t e d ef. (so that P is a c o m p l e t e l y r. a program) is a (finite list of p r o p e r t i e s that the o b j e c t is to satisfy. p.t. M i s c e l l a n e o u s notation. Sec.

will only w i t h the (ascertainable/computable) t r e a t e d as logical c o n s t r u c t i o n s out of properties. the n o t i o n of a c o m p l e t e l y p r i m e filter can be f o r m u l a t e d for arbitrary c o m p l e t e lattice. properties.i f i c a t i o n having the same n e i g h b o u r h o o d systems. for any family (Ui)i61 of open sets. in this approach. points should be Points. if U . X is T O p r o v i d e d that its s p e c i a l i z a t i o n p r e o r d e r is a p a r t i a l order.Y). We can n o w give a simple r e a s o n why computable functions should be e x p e c t e d to be continuous. w h e r e X . x E 0 ~ y s 0) -> x : y). C) Points vs. the statement that a space X is T O is e q u i v a l e n t to : . hence a r b i t r a r y o p e n sets. got by i d e n t i f y i n g p o i n t s We thus r e q u i r e spaces to have the "T O N o t e that for any space X w e have the ~ . then V 6 ~. be the basic r e p r e s e n t c o m p u t a b l e properties. (ii) Sober spaces. among other things. in X. L e t f: X -> Y be computable. A filter s a t i s f y i n g (3) is (2) (3) A subset ~ of ~ s a t i s f y i n g said to be c o m p l e t e l y prime. (basic) o p e n sets o f a space as the funda- (i) ~ . rather. computable.the p r o c e d u r e we shall adopt in Section 2 . If X is a space w i t h t o p o l o g y ~ . then. of Y to open sets of X. Y are "effective" spaces (so that. if l l~U' C ~ then U. p o s s e s s e s at least one of these properties.one forms the T 0 .y E X Equivalently. Pointless topology. A m o r e radical p o s i t i o n w o u l d be that. but to the p a r t i c u l a r open bases chosen. the three conditions: (i) ~(x) if U ~ ~. of X. A space X is T O p r o v i d e d ((V0 E ~(X). since we can be c o n c e r n e d p r o p e r t i e s of points. Vx. p r e s u m a b l y points h a v i n g the same n e i g h b o u r h o o d s should not be distinguished. V E ~ then U n V 6 ~. If we r e a l l y think of the m e n t a l p r o p e r t i e s of i n t e r e s t in that space. is Thus B is p-1(tt) L e t B be a basic. A l t e r n a t i v e l y . generally. o p e n sets and "effective" unions of them. be r e l a t i v e n o t just to the topologies of the spaces involved. let us w r i t e ~(x) for {0 ~ ~ I x ~ 0~ (more if ~ is any base for the topology. hence for some computable T h e n f-l(B) (p 9 f)-l(tt). as one m a y r e a d i l y check. p a r t i c u l a r bases are a s s u m e d for X.i f i c a t i o n by s e l e c t i n g a d i s t i n g u i s h e d e l e m e n t from each e q u i v a l e n c e class in the s p e c i a l i z a t i o n preorder.665 general. therefore an o p e n set. It is not s t r i c t l y c o r r e c t t h a t arbitrary open sets the computable p r o p e r t i e s will. s e p a r a t i o n property": D e f i n i t i o n I.s p a c e s . the intuitive m e a n i n g of (3) is that a p o i n t w h i c h possesses the d i s j u n c t i o n of the p r o p e r t i e s Ui. sets. ~an Clearly. we m a y w r i t e ~(x) Any subset ~ o f ~ such t h a t ~ = for the set of basic for some x satisfies o p e n n e i g h b o u r h o o d s of x). compose) (open set) in Y.l 6 ~ for some i. Now. B u t w h i c h b u n d l e s are appropriate? and x 6 X. be m e r e "bundles of properties". p r o p e r t y p: Y -> ~. hence (assuming that computable functions So f-i takes b a s i c open a c o m p u t a b l e property. V ~ ~ and U c V. (i) and (2) is a filter in ~.

there is at m o s t one p o i n t x such that a space is T O iff there is at m o s t one p o i n t w i t h a g i v e n b u n d l e of properties. there is exactly one p o i n t x s u c h that ~ = Loosely.Y are h o m e o m o r p h i c spaces. the r i g h t h a l f is a functor Pt w h i c h acts on objects by sending a frame to its space of c o m p l e t e l y prime filters. The space X is sober provided. T h a t is: for any p o s e t B. We note in p a s s i n g that. the c o m p l e t e l y p r i m e filters may be These filters in turn are in (orderOne i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the filters of basic opens +a. O n the other hand. not least w i t h respect to c o n s t r u c s . for a more "effective" t r e a t m e n t of the d e f i n i t i o n s and c o n s t r u c t i o n s c o n s i d e r e d here. since the morphisms in ~ p directions) b e t w e e n the sober spaces and the spatial frames. by the t h i r d condition. w h i c h w e m a y take as the set of all c o m p l e t e l y p r i m e filters in ~(X) (instead of just those w h i c h h a p p e n to c o r r e s p o n d to points in X). In detail. A space is there is a c o r r e s p o n d i n g n o t i o n of spatial The a d j u n c t i o n cuts down to an equivand ~__rm__ are in "opposite" R e c e n t w o r k has shown frames. if ~(X). Informally: in ~(X). preserving) b i j e c t i o n w i t h the ideals in BD. ~(Y) are i s o m o r p h i c lattices. D e f i n i t i o n 2.666 for any c o m p l e t e l y p r i m e filter = ~(X) (x). For any space X we have its s o b e r i f i c a t i o n (least sober extension). then 0 ~ ~ iff +a ~ ~ a ~ 0. The m o s t adequate is in terms of an a d j u n c t i o n b e t w e e n T ~ p and a (= c o m p l e t e The left s u i t a b l e c a t e g o r y of lattices . Several a l t e r n a t i v e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s of the sober spaces are d i s c u s s e d in w o r k s such as [3]. o b s e r v e s here that c o m p l e t i o n b y ideals m a y be c o n s i d e r e d as a special case of soberification. for D for some Examples (2) E v e r y algebraic cpo algebraic: if ~ is a c o m p l e t e l y p r i m e filter in ~(D). [7]. ~(X). For sober spaces X. (indeed. A sober space is one in w h i c h there is a p e r f e c t c o r r e s p o n d e n c e T h a t is: for e v e r y c o m p l e t e l y p r i m e filter ~ i n ~(X) (x). the c a t e g o r y of frames H e y t i n g algebras) and m a p s w h i c h p r e s e r v e finite m e e t s and arbitrary joins. one can w o r k w i t h an a r b i t r a r i l y chosen c o u n t a b l e b a s e ~in p l a c e o f ~(=~(X)) . c o n t i n u o u s poset) is sober.Y. half o f the a d j u n c t i o n is in effect ~. the S c o t t t o p o l o g y on the c o m p l e t i o n of B coincides w i t h the s o b e r i f i c a t i o n of the A l e x a n d r o f f t o p o l o g y on B. sober iff it is Pt(L) for some frame L. that t h e r e m a y be s i g n i f i c a n t advantages. w e m a y say that a space is sober iff it is c o m p l e t e l y d e t e r m i n e d by its lattice of properties. Frm. w i t h base for the t o p o l o g y the sets ~0 = {~I0 G ~}. In consequence. n a m e l y those w h i c h are values of ~.namely. b e t w e e n p o i n t s and b u n d l e s of properties. Sobr(X). a duality. (i) Every H a u s d o r f f space is sober. and h e n c e w i t h the points of D. where 0 ranges over ~(X). alence (or rather. every sober space is d i r e c t e d l y complete in its s p e c i a l i z a t i o n order. then X. It is i n t e r e s t i n g that not e v e r y cpo is sober in its Scott t o p o l o g y (Johnstone [i0]).

[2]: the p o w e r domains. one are c l o s e l y r e l a t e d [13]). Example. {0. On the o t h e r hand. ations of these are also possible.a' of x.i0}. and about spaces of subsets. (a s t r i k i n g This v i e w p o i n t informs m u c h of w h a t we are d o i n g in this it is not m a d e m o r e explicit. (Vietoris to ideas e x p o u n d e d as long ago as 1921 For inverses of m a n y . so as to spare the i n t r o d u c t i o n of too m u c h u n f a m i l i a r machinery. Combin- .x' A Bb E B such that some m e r g e of a.12 of (namely the c o m p l e t i o n of BD). it is natural to ask w h e t h e r there is a r e a s o n a b l e topology on Y such t h a t F is continuous as a m u l t i In function iff it is c o n t i n u o u s in the o r d i n a r y sense as a f u n c t i o n from X to 4~f.I> ~ FM+(S).a' extends b}. we find that <0.1}. F is c o n t i n u o u s if it is b o t h usc and isc. D e f i n i t i o n 3. if F+(Q) is closed w h e n e v e r Q is closed). is n o t open. then. and this is clearly open. the case of the three c o n t i n u i t i e s of Definition. Thus. some e l e m e n t o f S has P. suitable choice of D T h e o r e m 4.v a l u e d (or multi-) [22]. 2. G i v e n a n o t i o n of "property". Say Z is thus Example. b u t <00. there are i n d e e d easily d e f i n e d We w i l l arrive at these t o p o l o g i e s b y c o n s i d e r i n g some n o t i o n s of "properties of subsets" w h i c h r e a d i l y s u g g e s t themselves. FM+(S) T a k i n g S as +{01. w h e r e B is a set of finite sequences. N o w B D can be any poset. G i v e n a n o t i o n of c o n t i n u i t y for m u l t i f u n c t i o n s F: X -> Y. i. Finally. A m u l t i f u n c t i o n F: X -> Y is upper s e m i c o n t i n u o u s and lower s e m i c o n t i n u o u s (usc) if F+(0) is o p e n in X w h e n e v e r 0 is o p e n in Y. in particular. K u r a t o w s k i functions.1> ~ FM+(S). finds m u c h of relevance there. t h e n FM-(S) segments a. if S is an a r b i t r a r y open = {<x.667 in a v o i d i n g c o m m i t m e n t to "points" by w o r k i n g w i t h F { m rather than Top example is J o h n s t o n e paper. (isc) if F-(0) is open in X w h e n e v e r 0 is o p e n in Y (equivalently. Formally: or. then F+(S) is {xIFx c S} for S c y. w h i l e F-(S) is the r e l a t i o n a l inverse {xlFx N S ~ @}. so F M is not usc. P o w e r domains and V i e t o r i s t o p o l o g y In the s t u d y of the s e m a n t i c s of n o n d e t e r m i n i s m one s t r a n g e l y n e g l e c t e d avenue of a p p r o a c h is that of s e e i n g w h a t m a t h e m a t i c i a n s have h a d to say about c o n t i n u i t y notions for m a n y . cf.x'~13 finite initial set +B. a t o p o l o g y j over X w e have.e.v a l u e d functions. topologies on ~ Y w h i c h agree in this sense.1. a d a p t i n g the R e p r e s e n t a t i o n [23] (for e'lementary e v e n t structures) we find that the frames in q u e s t i o n are the p r i m e a l g e b r a i c complete lattices. two obvious d e r i v e d n o t i o n s of p r o p e r t y over subsets S of X: e v e r y e l e m e n t of S has a g i v e n p r o p e r t y P. W h a t frames are of the form ~(D) for D an algebraic cpo? The o p e n sets for of D are in b i j e c t i o n w i t h the +-closed subsets o f B D. [ii]). we adopt the n o t a t i o n of B e r g e if F: X -> Y is a m u l t i f u n c t i o n . The fair m e r g e function FM: ~ x ~ -> [~ is isc but not usc. On investigation.

the c o n v e x topology. R(p) ~ 0.> ~ w.. The Vietoris t o p o l o g y is the (in the lattice of topologies). and we give no p r i o r i t y to T1-spaces. Remark. topologies (details in T h e o r e m 2).) (least) c o m m o n refinement. s i m i l a r l y for lower s e m i .d e t e r m i n i s m .. l a b e l l e d w i t h finite e l e m e n t a. the upper t o p o l o g y on S has as the a base the c o l l e c t i o n of sets of the f o r m U 0 (0 o p e n in X). (or convex) t o p o l o g y takes as subbase b o t h the L 0 and the U 0.r.r.668 D e f i n i t i o n 4. is of course We c l a i m that the frontier F of such a tree T is compact. A further r e s t r i c t i o n (in the case of the u p p e r a n d convex topologies) arises from the desire to capture the idea of b o u n d e d n o n .l. F c l~i01. Indeed. such that for all j. the lub w h i l e the V i e t o r i s (The name convex is non-standard. suppose for if not. The set {p E T I Bi. be r e p r e s e n t e d as a finitely b r a n c h i n g tree T such that the p o s s i b l e results of the c o m p u t a t i o n form the "frontier" of T p a t h s of T). that two sets are e q u i v a l e n t w i t h r e s p e c t to the u p p e r t o p o l o g y iff they have the same +-closure (in the s p e c i a l i z a t i o n order).r.t. for any space X.. w e suppose.s e c t i o n of T for w h i c h e a c h a s s o c i a t e d set is contained in a single 0 .t. (limits a l o n g A little more precisely.) a p o i n t of one of those trees. we d e n o t e b y F: X -> ~ Y the c o r r e s p o n d i n g function. in general. lower topology. thus a I finite c o l l e c t i o n of the 0 suffices to c o v e r this c r o s s . it is t h e r e f o r e r e a s o n a b l e to r e s t r i c t to +-closed S i m i l a r remarks apply to the o t h e r two sets w h e n c o n s i d e r i n g the u p p e r topoIogy. and lower t o p o l o g i e s is trivial. . for example. X is fixed). It is e a s y to see. K ~ n i g ' s lemma implies that there is an infinite p a t h p0. that is. It follows that there is a (finite) 3 c r o s s .pl. the three and for c o n t i n u i t y w. A boundedly non-deter- m i n i s t i c p r o c e s s can. and that the sets o c c u r r i n g a l o n g any (The g e n e r a t i n g trees a s s o c i a t e d a set R ( p ) o f p a t h from a d e c r e a s i n g sequence h a v i n g a u n i q u e l i m i t point. of [20] are a special case of this. w h e r e L 0 = {SIS n 0 ~ ~}. Then. Let Y be a s p a c e . we s u p p o s e that w i t h each p o i n t of T is "potential" results. w h e r e U 0 = {SIS c 0}. One r e a s o n for r e s t r i c t i n g the class of sets is w e e n s u r e this b y p i c k i n g d i s t i n g u i s h e d W h y do we n o t simply take ~ to be ~X? to ensure that the r e s u l t i n g space is TO. The "set of p o t e n t i a l results" a s s o c i a t e d w i t h +a. G i v e n a space X and a subset ~ of ~ X . of the u p p e r a n d lower topologies.s e c t i o n and h e n c e F.g. elements f r o m the e q u i v a l e n c e classes. a is c o n t i n u o u s m u l t i f u n c t i o n F: Xl-> Y w i t h (multi)values in ~ is usc iff F: X . lower t o p o l o g y has as subbase the L 0.R(p) c 0 } m u s t be finite. The 91b o f the u p p e r Our d e f i n i t i o n of the three t o p o l o g i e s is m o r e g e n e r a l t h a n those u s u a l l y g i v e n [13]) in that we have p a r a m e t e r i z e d o n ~ (usually a p a r t i c u l a r c o l l e c t i o n c (e. (The i j u s t i f i c a t i o n of the r e s t r i c t i o n to c o m p a c t sets is taken up a g a i n at the end of this section.t.c o n t i n u i t y w. the Moreover. . ~ a (non-empty) subset of ~Y. finite is m o r e usual.) If F: X -> Y is a m u l t i f u n c t i o n . T h e o r e m i. w h i c h implies t h a t lim pj ~ 0 (for all I). the upper t o p o l o g y o n e .

Moreover.s p a c e s CONY(X) = CL(X) (see [14]). But. PSu(X) 0 CONV(X) and PSc(X) are the T 0 . c o n t i n u i t y notions for m u l t i f u n c t i o n s . the s p e c i a l i z a t i o n o r d e r d e r i v e d from the lower topology. Proof The (sub-)bases of the three t o p o l o g i e s o n ~ are so c h o s e n as to make the first (notice that a f u n c t i o n is continuous if the inverse For uniqueness. Tl-Spaces one needs to w o r k w i t h convex and not just closed sets m a i n c o n t r i b u t i o n s of P l o t k i n [15]). upper and convex topologies. by definition. D e f i n i t i o n 5. are the canonical (largest) elements of o We have The "hyperspace" m o s t u s u a l l y studied is CL(X) w i t h the V i e t o r i s topology. m o d u l o the r e s t r i c t i o n to compactness. Now. and. of y such that x ~ 0y. Also. +S is the largest set e q u i v a l e n t to S: x ~ +S then for e a c h y ~ S there is an open n e i g h b o u r h o o d 0 that. The lower p o w e r space of X. PSc: Since S c conv(S) c S. H e n c e . topologies ~ . an o p e n set 0 contains a set S iff +S ~ 0. if Y mC S t h e n Y c hence Y c conv(S). p u t t i n g U = y E yS0y. Notation~ 0 +S.C). S mC conv(S A n easy c a l c u l a t i o n shows that conv(conv(S)) (since Y mL S) and Y ~ +S (since Y m u S). a p o i n t x is in S iff e v e r y o p e n set c o n t a i n i n g x m e e t s L S' iff It follows at once that S is the largest set e q u i v a l e n t to S and that S m E L S' PSu: Evidently.~') cannot b o t h be D the i d e n t i t y functions b e t w e e n We now introduce our d e f i n i t i o n of the three "power spaces" of a (sober) space. is also compact. r e s t r i c t e d to c o m p a c t sets as we are i n t e r e s t e d in m o d e l l i n g b o u n d e d n o n . X. COMP(X) Proof PSL(X).i f i c a t i o n s o f t a k e n w i t h the lower. w i t h the convex topology. our t h e o r y is e q u i v a l e n t B u t it seems clear that to have a g o o d t h e o r y applicable to non(this is one of the to the usual one. H e n c e S mU +S. PSu(X). n o t i c e that d i s t i n c t s t a t e m e n t of the T h e o r e m trivial image of e a c h s u b b a s i c o p e n set is open). similarly. r e s t r i c t e d to T 1 . S denotes the closure of S.~) a n d (Z. S ~L cony(S).PSL(X).669 t o p o l o g i e s on ~ a r e u n i q u e l y d e t e r m i n e d by the r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t they agree w i t h the in this sense. PSL: Clearly. t a k e n w i t h the lower the u p p e r p o w e r space. ~' on a set Z cannot y i e l d the same set of c o n t i n u o u s functions w i t h (Z. UC(X) For S c X. it suffices to show that S m L S' respectively. . COMP(X) and and the convex p o w e r space.e q u i v a l e n c e classes in (COMP(X). if X is TI. = conv(S). Further. S ~U cony(S). we have S ~ U w h i l e x ~ U. L e t X be a space. CL(X). is +-closed and c o m p a c t We use ~ L for sets of X respectively. and if S since if is c o m p a c t then so is +S.d e t e r m i n i s m (but see remarks at end of this section). is COMP(X) is COMP(X) N UC(X) w i t h the u p p e r topology. so Y The c o n c l u s i o n follows as before. CONV(X) is the set of fixed p o i n t s of conv. if S is compact t h e n conv(S). in effect. PSc(X) T h e o r e m 2. topology. w h i l e cony(S) and COMP(X) are the sets of closed. Z as codomain: continuous. iff (in the lower topology) S mL . is CL(X) s i m i l a r l y for ~C' mL' etc. all sets are +-closed. We have thus shown that the elements o f PSc(X) the m c .7 9 S. The s t a n d a r d t r e a t m e n t is. Finally. as the i n t e r s e c t i o n of a closed set w i t h a c o m p a c t set.

C . K 0 c 0 and K0 ~ choose K 0 t ~ b e since +S = |So00. we can find an element K 0 o f M(D) S. a ~ b F o r c o m p l e t e n e s s we treat. F i n d b ~ B such that b ~ x. We usually omit the s u b s c r i p t L for the S c D c o m p a c t and non-empty.d i r e c t e d . Define the p r e . A~B iff ~ ~ H ^ A ~ H .C_C. upper (or Smyth). Smyth. since if A. For each a @ A such that Find x 6 S suppose A. ~ b ~ B.B ~ K+An+ ~ B Finally. PDc(D) . ~ a 6 A .o r d e r s ~ . d i f f i c u l t to show that.~.~_L) onto D. Also.~) is a p r e o r d e r the_n (~CH(E). is the set of ~-chains of E. L e t D be ~-algebraic. w h e r e M(D) empty finite subsets of B D. such that then If 0 is an open s u p e r s e t of S. its dual. or [20]. We w i l l n e x t show that. the p o w e r spaces reduce to the u s u a l p o w e r domains over D. PDu(D) . However. L e m m a i. and t h a t de Bakker and Zucker a l l o w a r b i t r a r y closed sets.r e f l e c t i n g s u r j e c t i o n of [X] for the ideal g e n e r a t e d b y an ~ . A c t u a l l y we find i t c o n ~ n i e n t .p r e s e r v i n g and . For. augment K by adding to it an e l e m e n t A' chosen as follows.a C b m A ~ B iff Vb s B . Then the set U S = {A ~ M(D) IA C_U S} is ~ . such t h a t a C x.670 It has been p r o p o s e d by de Bakker and Zucker [4~ to use. A.b = c. they do not coincide in the n o n . by: A ~ E B iff V a ~ A . since S is compact. a u g m e n t K by a similarly chosen b'.B C U S w e have It also follows t h a t U S is ~ . HA E M(D). d e n o t e d PDL(D) .d i r e c t e d . to w o r k w i t h w-chains r a t h e r than d i r e c t e d ideals. a ~ c. 6 C S} = %S. . Moreover Proof ~{+AIA 6 U S } = ~{+AIA and C S = {A ~ M(D) IA C C S} is C c-directed. are the completions by ideals of M(D). for e a c h b ~ B such that Bc @ K. We w r i t e (pre-) o r d e r .c o m p a c t situation. (equivalence classes of) If (E.a l g e b r a i c cpo. | A ~ 0 ^ S c +A.~ o n M(D) --L --U--C Let D be an w . for the compact (and t h e r e f o r e closed) H a u s d o r f f m e t r i c t o p o l o g y coincides w i t h the V i e t o r i s topology. p r e o r d e r on chains. in case D is an a l g e b r a i c cpo. along w i t h the upper. there is a q u e s t i o n as to w h i c h is the b e s t t o p o l o g y Michael [14] argues that the H a u s d o r f f m e t r i c to Use in the n o n . sometimes k n o w n as the Hoare p o w e r domain.B . u n d e r the r e s p e c t i v e o r d e r i n g s ~L. S W r i t e K for K + A n % B. m o s t of the time. the It is true that the H a u s d o r f f m e t r i c on the closed subsets of a m e t r i c sPace X. t o p o l o g y is m a t h e m a t i c a l l y less s a t i s f a c t o r y t h a n the Vietoris topology. w h e r e ~CH(E) of E.C S. ~ Bc ~ K . p o w e r d o m a i n D e f i n i t i o n 6.b ~ a' ~ x. and convex (or Plotkin) power domains T h e n the lower of D. a m i n i m a l such A. Following [20]. w e shall define the p o w e r domains is the set of non- of D as c o m p l e t i o n s of M(D) u n d e r suitable orderings. [or Hoare).c o m p a c t case. as a p o w e r space construct. The last a s s e r t i o n of the lemma follows at once.EL). T h e n choose a' such that a. is a p r e o r d e r e q u i v a l e n t to the c o m p l e t i o n To show that E is i s o m o r p h i c to a cpo D it suffices to show that t h e r e is a (~CH(E). N o w it is n o t subsets of X.c h a i n X.

k)) K & H ~L K (notice that if H i ~ and that H ~_~ K iff [HI c [K]. C x.l 3 ~+K.. . some H: Further... with PDL(D) . taken with its Scott topology... corresponding that H i % b0 ~ b I ~ --- Kj. + PSc(X). if H ~ K then for each i there exists j with 0n the other hand. suppose x @ ~u(H)..)l and a i ~ }(H) ~ ai+ I --~ . #L = ( ) o L is the isomorphism considered +%(H) c Cu(H).e. For. + suppose Q ~ PSc(D). (ii) Then PDu(D): % For an w-chain H = H0 ~4J HI ~_U. with each b ~ +Hi. in (i).c). --- K~nig's Lemma) then that there is a chain a 0 ~ a i ~ . Let H be an ~-chain cofinal with CQ (see it is clear that ~L([H]) c Q.bn> . we could by KSnig's Lemma find an infinite path ~ +Hi.B~_c K' ~--C S. [] the empty set is usually excluded from consideration. +~(H) = ~u(H). is order-preserving: define #u(H) = 0+H. so that a ~. such 3 J for if not. [20]) whose finite paths are all the sequences <b0. by (i) and (ii). K. sets are) the K. + PDL(D) onto PSL(D) (i... (iii) #(H) where PDc(D) : = ~u(H) For an ~-chain H = H 0 ~-C HI C--C . Hence. PSu(D) Theorem 3. Further.._l @ ~(H). (CL(D). e n d u e . Then A. To show that for some j. PDH(D) and PDc(D) Proof (i) ideal in (M(D). Then PSi(D). (for suitable ai+ k E Hi+ k ). let L(I) = {ai{a} ~ I}. it is Thus ~(K) iff #u(H) ~ clear that H C C K iff H ~ Hi ~ Kmax(j. The cross-sections of this tree are (multisets whose where b i ~ K i and b i ~ bi~ I. suppose a ~ Q (a finite). in (M(D).. ii indeed..671 Let K' be the result of all these augmentations In defining the power domains.a. while if a @ #L([H]) we have a ~ a i (for some a i ~ H. This means (using obviously On the other hand.C_L) . Then {a} U H 0 ~ C Q. of K. H CC K iff r (H) ~C r (K). and so x 6 }~(H) . First.. h e n c e ~ J K 3 ~ +X i -" This shows that ~U is order-reflecting. we have only to choose an H cofinal with UQ. and H i ~L HK then ] Hence. Similarly...c). We consider +H i _= +Kj. For each i there must be a cross-section K.. define n #L([H]) .~). .5)). and indeed L is an isomorphism of PSL(D) onto (~. then #U(H) = +Q. Let D be an U-algebraic cpo. respectively. i--'3 = the generating tree (cf. where ~ i s If Z @ ~ t h e n the set of non-empty +-closed subsets of B D (with L -I as ~fin). + For the comparison of power spaces with power domains we therefore define PSL(X) to + be the subspace of the non-empty elements of PSL(X) .. and PS (D) are isomorphic. PDL(D) : in their specialization orders. with inverse S ~>+S n B D. if I is a (directed) Z = {xi+x n B D c Z}~ and closure is an isomorphism of (~. But 1 ll-~ = #L( [H]) : the left- to-right inclusion is again trivial. so that ~+H. + mines an isomorphism of PDu(D) onto PSu(D). J 33 .. h e n c e ~ b .. a I ~ #u(H) n ~L( [HI) . and similarly for PSu(X) .c) onto Thus (-) o L is the required isomorphism of (CL(D). with a i 6 H. For surjectivity. + Then L(I) is a +-closed subset of BD. suppose ~ + H i ~ ~+~j.. every compact +-closed set Q is ~H(H) for Thus ~U deter- by Lemma I. #L([H]) ~ Q. Lemma i). l ~u(K) and #L([H]) ~L }L (~EK])" At the same time.

in the n e x t section. the p r e s e n t context. that one can e f f e c t i v e l y enumerate all of) the p r o p e r t i e s w h i c h b e l o n g to it. for L a complete lattice w i t h is the c o l l e c t i o n of o p e n filters in L.g. except for the r e l a t i v e l y u n i n t e r e s t i n g (for details.) Scott topology. T h e n the upper t o p o l o g y on ~(S I) . (See H o f m a n n & Mislove O p e n filters p r o v i d e the link by w h i c h we c o n n e c t the upper p o w e r space w i t h w e a k e s t p r e c o n d i t i o n semantics. nor is the (or Smyth) p o w e r d o m a i n of S~. ~. has to be rather indirect. taken w i t h the Scott topology. An e q u a l l y satisfactory d e s c r i p t i o n does not s e e m to be available for the convex p o w e r space. if ~ i s any open filter in ~(X). is due to the following r e m a r k a b l e A set Q c x is c o m p a c t iff the set Let X be a sober space. then n ~ i s of n ~ t h e n (@Su(X).c). w h e r e 0 F i l t e r L. and r e f e r e n c e s g i v e n there.. said above to j u s t i f y the choice of c o m p a c t sets.{@}. E g l i . compact Moreover. and the p o w e r d o m a i n is a cpo. the V i e t o r i s t o p o l o g y gives e x a c t l y the c o n v e x (~(SI) .. [9]. +-closed). in the general case. of course.. these m a t t e r s are e x p l o r e d in [21]. We conclude this section w i t h some brief remarks on the i n f i n i t a r y p o w e r d o m a i n s i n t r o d u c e d r e c e n t l y by Apt and Plotkin (countable) as in [i]. in terms of free t o p o l o g i c a l semilattices. (Plotkin) p o w e r d o m a i n ~tthe same time. N define an order-isomorphism (0 Filt(~(x)). w e can n o w add something to that A specification. is finitary if the f o l l o w i n g . [i]. upper d o m a i n a cpo. We shall say that a specification.{~} gives e x a c t l y the i n f i n i t a r y This upper t o p o l o g y is not sober. = {0 ~ ~(X) IQ ~ Q} is an o p e n filter. FACT ~*(Q) The special i n t e r e s t of open filters. see [21])'. can be t a k e n to Since the set of p r o p e r t i e s to be s a t i s f i e d and logical i m p l i c a t i o n be a countable collection of open sets. [] P l o t k i n has o b s e r v e d that the p o w e r d o m a i n s over an algebraic cpo have a c o n v e n i e n t u n i v e r s a l characterisation. is finitary is thus e q u i v a l e n t to saying that it is itself an o p e n set in the complete lattice ~(X).M i l n e r ordering). we have s h o w n t h a t #(H) = Q. computable. in the general case. is c o n d i t i o n holds: in ~ . upper nondeterminism. Thus a ~ ~L([H]). One n a t u r a l l y tries to extend this to p o w e r spaces.672 {a} U Z 0 ~ Z j. in terms of "specifications". is o b v i o u s l y closed under c o n j u n c t i o n (intersection) (inclusion). . in this case the hopology is sober. and (and. or. f o l l o w i n g the ideas of Section i. P l o t k i n [17] for h a n d l i n g u n b o u n d e d C o n s i d e r first the case of a flat. It seems that the j u s t i f i c a t i o n of the A little has b e e n lower p o w e r space p o w e r spaces. we have suggested. countable domain SI. that it is (the indices in in the sense. w h e n e v e r the union 0 of an i n c r e a s i n g sequence 00 c 01 c To say that the filter ~ c ~(X) some 0 i is already in ~ . e.~) 0 6 ~.g e n e r a t e d filter of open sets. U n f o r t u n a t e l y this does not work. ~re not v e r y interesting: The lower t o p o l o g y and p o w e r d o m a i n they are the same as in the finite case. n a m e l y as free c o n t i n u o u s semilattices (see [8]). we may as well say t h a t a s p e c i f i c a t i o n is a c o u n t a b l y . and if 0 is any open s u p e r s e t between Hence the maps ~*.

Now. f+ cuts down to a function from ~(Y) the p o i n t b e i n g that. and similarly for the is the s o b e r i f i c a t i o n of the Vietoris topology on ~fin(D). continuous f u n c t i o n f r o m ~(Y) t ~ ~(X). upper inverse can be said to c o r r e s p o n d to the w e a k e s t precondition: In j u s t i f i c a t i o n of these remarks. m u l t i p l i c a t i v e . are or properties. naturally. one suggestion is to treat the i n f i n i t a r y p o w e r spaces/ domains a n a l o g o u s l y to the finitary ones. just as ~ is a is a functor from the category But we w i l l not dwell on to Q(X). For Y a sober space. consider the p r e d i c a t e t r a n s f o r m e r s as i n t r o d u c e d by Dijkstra [6] and their correspondence.d e t e r m i n i s t i c state transformations t a k e n as that of X is ~(X). [X -> PDu(YI)]. upper and lower p o w e r spaces. conditions. satisfying D i j k s t r a ' s h e a l t h i n e s s is a strict.d e t e r m i n i s t i c ST's We w i l l be able to treat deterin a u n i f o r m way by (with indeed it extends to arbitrary sober (state transformations) r e g a r d i n g t h e m as maps f r o m X into the space Filt(~(Y)) b a s i c open sets the G0 = {~I0 s ~}. 3. Thus.d e t e r m i n i s t i c maps can be e x t e n d e d far b e y o n d the case of d i s c r e t e spaces c o n s i d e r e d by D i j k s t r a and Plotkin.Y. by the above FACT. w i t h o p e n sets. The wp(f. investigated by Plotkin [16]. w i t h this v i e w of p r e d i c a t e transformers. Since we i d e n t i f y predicates. D. P l o t k i n observes that there is an order i s o m o r p h i s m b e t w e e n the ~ p o of) h e a l t h y p r e d i c a t e t r a n s f o r m e r s from Y to X and the domain o f n o n . as well as of Y itself. m i n i s t i c and n o n . the p o i n t s of PSu(Y). p o n d e n c e w i t h n o n . one could try the B u t w h e t h e r this leads anywhere is s o b e r i f i c a t i o n of the space of countable subsets. then. functor from ~ p into Frm.673 As for general domains. not k n o w n at present. w e have only to give it a v a l u e for the a r g u m e n t YI. For the infinitary construct. one observes that the (finitary) convex p o w e r space of an algebraic cpo. r e p l a c i n g finite sets b y countable sets. w h i l e In o r d e r to regard a p r e d i c a t e transformer P: ~(Y) -> ~(X) as a m a p from ~(YI) to ~(X).S) = f+(S). (including the null interthe corres- O u r c l a i m is that. of filters in ~(Y) . then. w i t h non- d e t e r m i n i s t i c state transformations. Predicate Transformers R e c a l l that w e have d e f i n e d the "upper" inverse f+ of a (multi-)map f: X -> Y as f+: ~ Y -> ~X: S -> {xlf(x ) c S}. for 0 ~ ~(Y)). the c a t e g o r i c a l aspect here. m a p s from ~(Y) to ~(X) (the a p p r o p r i a t e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of) p r e d i c a t e t r a n s f o r m e r s in our framework. That is. ~+ (with ~+ = ~ o n objects) of spaces and usc maps into a m o d i f i e d category of frames. W h e n f is usc. w h i c h we m i g h t d e n o t e by ~+(f). X. Here w e are c o n c e r n e d w i t h discrete state sets A p r e d i c a t e t r a n s f o r m e r from Y to X. can be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h suitable filters in ~(Y). w e assume P(YI) t r a n s f o r m e r s to be the = X. spaces. we consider the d o m a i n of (healthy) p r e d i c a t e (pointwise ordered) p o s e t of maps ~(YI) -> ~(X) w h i c h are strict and continuous and p r e s e r v e finite i n t e r s e c t i o n s section). the t o p o l o g y of Y 1 is 8(Y) U {YI}.

~ cuts down to (i) and an o r d e r . it suffices to show that and that this remains (i. It remains to show that ~ and T cut down appropriately. Since f(x) is c o m p l e t e l y II 11 prime. the PT ~ (f) satisfies that.) for some i. equivalently. [X -> Y] and the p o s e t of PT's It cuts down further to an o r d e r .e. indicated. ~) and true on cutting down in the ways (i. that is. Let (QI)%6I be a family of open sets in Y. f: X -> 0 Filt(Q(Y)) 01 c 02 c Suppose that (recall that this codomain is identified with PSu(Y)) . 0 i 6 f(x) for some i. ~ f(x). other hand. since ~(f)(0) between p ~ (i) [X -> Filt(~(Y))] and the p o s e t of PT's (predicate transformers) [~(Y) -> ~(X)] w h i c h satisfy p is monotonic and strict. for each x s X. Moreover. Then. Suppose that x ~ ~(f) ( U 0 ) . Suppose now that f: X -> Y (here we are of course identifying Y with the space of completely prime filters in ~(Y)). thus ll x ~ ~(f) (0. This shows that ~(f) is 1 1 additive. Proof of T h e o r e m 4. T . ~(f): ~(Y) Let X. the Remark. and let sequence in ~(Y). again. one readily checks that condition (i) implies that T(p) (x) is a filter. that T 9 n(f) (x) = f(x)). Since f(x) is (Scott-)open.. be an increasing This means that U0. suppose ~(p ~ q). . For a continuous map f: X -> Filt(~(Y)). between and preserves finite meets. Again. x ~ q(0). define T(p): X -> Filt(~(Y)) T(p) (x) = {0ix ~ p(0)}. One shows similarly l that if p satisfies (i) and (2). preserves arbitrary sups). ~(T(p) ! T(q)) . of meet. preserves directed under our assump- tion that spaces are second countable.Y be sober spaces. then ~(p) maps X into Y. it is easy to See that if p satisfies conditions (i) and (2'). (i.i s o m o r p h i s m continuity of f. On the T(p) (x) = {0ix E p(0) } c {0ix 6 q(0) } = T(q) (x) .z(f) (x) = {0ix ~ ~(f) (0)} = {010 s f(x)} = f(x).i s o m o r p h i s m (2) p is continuous [X -> PSu(Y)] and the poset of PT's satisfying sups. (well-known) at the end of Section to check that. = {xl0 C f(x)} ~ ~0}).e. in other words U0 ~ f(x). T(p) ! T(q) . Suppose also that x ~ ~(f) (U0i).i s o m o r p h i s m satisfying (2') (i) and between p is completely additive (i.e.. one uses the fact -> ~(X) for example. (A) T is a right inverse of ~ To prove the theorem. (for p r e s e r v a t i o n 0 N 0' E ~ for any f: X -> Filt(~(Y)). T(p) ~ T(q) iff p ! q)" (B) T is strictly m o n o t o n i c we have For the right inverse property. p preserves sups of ~-chains). some 0 q f(x).674 T h e o r e m 4. 0 e ~ A 0' ~ ~). by: For any p: ~(Y) satisfying (i). for any filter It is straightforward (i) 7. Thus x 6 ~(f) ( 0 ) for some %. This shows that ~(f) is continuous. Then for some x ~ X. . that is p(0) c q(0) for all 0 6 ~(Y). 0 E Y we have x ~ p(0) while that is. B) Suppose p ~ q.e. The final part of the t h e o r e m duality result m e n t i o n e d (concerning [X -> Y]) is essentially I. then T(p) maps X into 0 Filt(~(Y)). Then let -> ~(X) be defined by ~(f)(0) = {xif(x) (~(f) (0) is open in X by ~defines an o r d e r .. Thus strict mono- But then T(p) (x) ~ T(q) (x) .

Springer (1980). Testing equivalences for processes. (U. pp.. Plotkin. 14. Plotkin. Plotkin. P. 2. MFCS. Edinburgh (1981). J.) SERC. Events in Computation. Edinburgh (1982). 17. P. Trans. K.. Denotational semantics of concurrency. 173-204 (1921).. 871 (1981).. Zucker. de Nicola. 8. Proc. ICALP 1981. J. of course. Comput. Fund. Cambridge U. Dijkstra. 9.. Lawson. almost inexhaustible. 10.. L.675 tonicity obtains. The viewpoint of the upper powerdomain/predicate that a process passes a test transformer approach is. 21-35 (1981). Full abstraction for a simple parallel programming language. pp. Gierz. Hennessy.. Apt. 23. Math. Mislove. Johnstone. 12. A Discipline of Programming. Plotkin. Powerdomain and hyperspace. A powerdomain for countable non-determinism. Thesis. 209-248). ed.. 113. 7.. G. Tychonoff's theorem without the axiom of choice. To appear. M. the theorem is proved. M. Math. M. Prentice-Hall (1976). 21. Springer LNCS 74... A powerdomain construction. Continuous Lattices.. Michael.. .. Banaschewski and Hoffman. It is interesting to note that (independently of the above) de Nicola and Hennessy have recently developed exactly this approach to the equivalence of processes.152-182 (1951). Johnstone. AMS 71. iff all its possible computations (satisfies a property) do so . Revised edition. H. 11. 153-158 (1982). 452-487 (1976). Academic Press and PWN (1966). D.. Proc. M. Phys. Smyth. 108-120 (1979). Topologies on spaces of subsets. G. SIAM J.that is. [5] Acknowledgements Discussions with Gordon Plotkin have been very helpful. 31. C. Edinburgh (1980).. JCSS 16 (1978). 14th ACM STOC. P. Monatsh.. 18. J.. Hofmann. Dunod..pp.. in a very general setting. Bj~rner) LNCS 86 (1980). Keimel. K. Berge.. A Cook's tour of countable non-determinism. 4. Dept. 283-284). G. it must pass the test. and the conjunction of th Given a notion of successful computation. Mislove. Springer LN Math.. R. Local compactness and continuous lattices: in [3] (pp. Plotkin. K. Kuratowski. 479-494 (1981). the resulting specialization orders will give three preorders and equivalence notions for processes. 5. Proceedings Bremen 1979. (more precisely.. A Compendium of Continuous Lattices. 16.. Financial support has been provided by the References I. Plotkin. G. ICALP 1982. M. Smyth. Rogers.. pp. Hofmann... [7] has proved to be a continuing. ponds to the lower topology two (convex topology). Espaces Topologiques: Fonctions Multivoques.. between a denotational semantic using the upper power domain/space and axiomatic semantics in the manner of Dijkstra. Theory of Recursive Functions. G. Scott is not always sober: in [3] (pp. G. Dijkstra's predicate transformers and Smyth's powerdomains. Domains: notes for lecture course. 19. G. of Computer Science. Proc.. Proc. Vietoris. de Bakker. Hennessy. (198?). Also to be considered is the view which corrr (the process may pass the test). Topology. pp. CSR-123-82. D. 3. 15. pp. u.. f. Scott. Abstract Software Specifications (ed. 13. Winskel. The comprehensive treatise source of inspiration. Johnstone. Power domains. E.K.pp. 6. K.. 5. K.P. E. Stone Spaces.. Springer-Verlag LNCS 115. of part (2) of the theorem) is that The significance of this theorem it gives us an equivalence. 20. M. G. Paris (1959). 22.