Benchmarking Explicit State Parallel Model Checkers

Jones, Michael; Mercer, Eric; Bao, Tonglaga; Kumar, Rahul; Lamborn, Peter

doi:10.1016/s1571-0661(05)80098-2

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The modified Dijkstra's token termination algorithm is more reliable than the algorithm based on idle time used in [1]. The Hopper implementation has been successfully tested and analyzed on two platforms with 256 processors and different communication fabrics [5].…”

Section: Hoppermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The current release of Hopper contains parallel and disk based algorithms published by Dill and Stern [1,2] and heuristic search using the heuristic proposed by Edelkamp [3]. Hopper also includes parallel and guided search algorithms developed by the BYU model checking research group [4][5][6]. Hopper is a testbed for ideas that will be incorporated in our forthcoming C/C++ model checker built as an extension of the GNU debugger (GDB).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Explicit State Model Checking with Hopper

Jones

Mercer

2004

Model Checking Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The Murϕ-based Hopper tool is a general purpose explicit model checker. Hopper leverages Murϕ's class structure to implement new algorithms. Hopper differs from Murϕ in that it includes in its distribution published parallel and disk based algorithms, as well as several new algorithms. For example, Hopper includes parallel dynamic partitioning, cooperative parallel search for LTL violations and property-based guided search (parallel or sequential). We discuss Hopper in general and present a recently implemented randomized guided search algorithm. In multiple parallel guided searches, randomization increases the expected average time to find an error but decreases the expected minimum time to find an error.The Hopper 1 tool leverages the Murϕ architecture to implement parallel, disk-based and heuristic model checking algorithms. The common theme in the algorithms implemented in Hopper is that they do not use abstraction. Instead, Hopper explores fundamental algorithms for reducing time and space capacity limitations in state generation and storage. Our intention is that algorithms implemented in Hopper can be combined with well-known abstraction techniques. The algorithms studied in Hopper are generic enough to be implemented in any state enumeration context-including software model checking. The current release of Hopper contains parallel and disk based algorithms published by Dill and Stern [1, 2] and heuristic search using the heuristic proposed by Edelkamp [3]. Hopper also includes parallel and guided search algorithms developed by the BYU model checking research group [4][5][6]. Hopper is a testbed for ideas that will be incorporated in our forthcoming C/C++ model checker built as an extension of the GNU debugger (GDB). The Hopper distribution includes a suite of 177 benchmark verification problems for Murϕ. This paper describes the architecture and algorithms implemented in Hopper along with a new randomized guided algorithm we have recently implemented. Randomization increases the variance (and the mean) of the search effort required to find a property violation. Search effort is measured by the number of transitions taken. In some problems, increasing the variance (even at the expense of increasing the mean) decreases the expected minimum number of transitions taken in error discovery using in parallel searches.

show abstract

Section: Hoppermentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Explicit State Model Checking with Hopper

Jones

Mercer

2004

Model Checking Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is also significant interest in benchmarks in the model checking community (see e.g., Corbett [3], Avrunin et al [5], Atiya et al [1], Jones et al [8]). Nevertheless, the progress up to date has been rather slow.…”

Section: Experimental Work In Model Checkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

BEEM: Benchmarks for Explicit Model Checkers

Pelánek

Model Checking Software

182

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present Beem -BEnchmarks for Explicit Model checkers. This benchmark set includes more than 50 parametrized models (300 concrete instances) together with their correctness properties (both safety and liveness). The benchmark set is accompanied by an comprehensive web portal, which provides detailed information about all models. The web portal also includes information about state spaces and facilities for selection of models for experiments. The address of the web portal is http://anna.fi.muni.cz/models.

show abstract

Generating Counter-Examples Through Randomized Guided Search

Rungta

Mercer

Model Checking Software

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Benchmarking Explicit State Parallel Model Checkers

Cited by 5 publications

References 3 publications

Explicit State Model Checking with Hopper

Explicit State Model Checking with Hopper

BEEM: Benchmarks for Explicit Model Checkers

Generating Counter-Examples Through Randomized Guided Search

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About