[moca] On the definition of bisimulation

[Pietro Braione <braione@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This my first post on this mailing list, so I think
I should introduce myself briefly. I am a phd student
at Politecnico di Milano, in Italy. My research topic
is, roughly speaking, models for network- and
context-aware systems.

I have a question about bisimulation.
In many places I found it defined as follows:
A relation R on the states of your favorite
transition system is a bisimulation iff:

1: it is a simulation;
2: its inverse is a simulation.

However there are authors who replace 2 with:

2': it is symmetric.

I have noticed that these authors do not worry
about the fact that the two definitions are not
equivalent. This makes me argue that perhaps it
is not so important assuming one definition or
the other. If effectively it is not, why? Maybe
because they yield the same bisimilarity
equivalence?

Thank you for your kind attention.

Pietro Braione

 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The "models for mobility" mailing list     mailto:moca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www-sop.inria.fr/mimosa/personnel/Davide.Sangiorgi/moca.html