2021
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-90870-6_35
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

HyperProb: A Model Checker for Probabilistic Hyperproperties

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our approach builds on a symbolic representation of the family of the controllers and an abstraction refinement strategy allowing for an effective exploration of the families. A detailed experimental evaluation demonstrates that our approach considerably outperforms HyperProb [18], a state-of-the-art tool based on SMT reasoning. In particular, our approach scales to more complicated synthesis problems where HyperProb times out, and, for the first time, effectively supports in the synthesis procedure structural constraints on the resulting controllers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Our approach builds on a symbolic representation of the family of the controllers and an abstraction refinement strategy allowing for an effective exploration of the families. A detailed experimental evaluation demonstrates that our approach considerably outperforms HyperProb [18], a state-of-the-art tool based on SMT reasoning. In particular, our approach scales to more complicated synthesis problems where HyperProb times out, and, for the first time, effectively supports in the synthesis procedure structural constraints on the resulting controllers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our experimental evaluation focuses on the following key questions: Q1: How does the proposed deductive approach perform in comparison to the stateof-the-art SMT based approach implemented in HyperProb [18]? Q2: Can the deductive approach effectively handle synthesis problems that include structural constraints?…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations