2004
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-30476-0_11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SAT-Based Verification of Safe Petri Nets

Abstract: Abstract.Bounded model checking has received recent attention as an efficient verification method. The basic idea behind this new method is to reduce the model checking problem to the propositional satisfiability decision problem or SAT. However, this method has rarely been applied to Petri nets, because the ordinary encoding would yield a large formula due to the concurrent and asynchronous nature of Petri nets. In this paper, we propose a new SAT-based verification method for safe Petri nets. This method can… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
30
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our experiments, SAT-S performs at least as well as the analogous approach using process semantics [17] (this is also confirmed by the results in Heljanko and Junttila's recent tutorial [18]), therefore we report only the former in Table 1. With Corbett's benchmarks, we show different bounds for SAT-C than those reported in [25]; this is due to using a different initial state, the same as the one considered in [18]. For SAT-I and SAT-C both the encoding time and the bczchaff circuit SAT-solver runtime are reported in Table 1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In our experiments, SAT-S performs at least as well as the analogous approach using process semantics [17] (this is also confirmed by the results in Heljanko and Junttila's recent tutorial [18]), therefore we report only the former in Table 1. With Corbett's benchmarks, we show different bounds for SAT-C than those reported in [25]; this is due to using a different initial state, the same as the one considered in [18]. For SAT-I and SAT-C both the encoding time and the bczchaff circuit SAT-solver runtime are reported in Table 1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…For our symbolic algorithms, this check simply requires us to remove the set of states enabling α, i.e., Img −1 ( S, D α ), for each event α, from the final bounded state space. We compare the performance of several decision-diagram-based methods and the SAT-based methods of Heljanko et al [18,19] and Ogata et al [25].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations