Establish the truth or otherwise of the following statements: A: Given a set of messages m1, m2 and m3, {(m1 → m2), ¬(m3 → m2)} ≡ (m1 → {m2, m3}), where → denotes Lamport’s ’happens before’ relation and denotes concurrent messages; B: The finite state-machine representation of a concurrent algorithm P is more useful in: (i) Reducing the number of error scenarios to be handled in P; (ii) Verifying the correctness of P; (iii) Describing P concisely for a software-level implementation; and (iv) Improving the run-time performance of P. C: Given a set of events E and a set of states S of a concurrent algorithm P, the structural complexity of software to realize P is indicated by: (i) the number of events in E, (ii) the number of states in S, (iii) the number of state-event pairs in E × S, and (iv) how frequent the events in E occur during execution of P. D: With partially-synchronous channels between processes where the upper-bound ∆ on network message-delays is finite but is not known to the sender, a process failure can be accurately determined1. Give an example for each case, to support your answer