Towards model checking stochastic process algebra

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 1945 LNCS, Issue , 2000, Pages 420-439

  Hermanns, Holger ^a   Katoen, Joost Pieter ^a   Meyer Kayser, Joachim ^b   Siegle, Markus ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGEBRA; FORMAL METHODS; MODEL CHECKING; RANDOM PROCESSES; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

ALGEBRAIC APPROACHES; ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES; BEHAVIOUR-ORIENTED; MODEL CHECKING ALGORITHM; PERFORMANCE AND RELIABILITIES; PERFORMANCE MODELLING; STATE PROBABILITY; STOCHASTIC PROCESS ALGEBRAS;

STOCHASTIC MODELS;

EID: 84894554353     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-40911-4_24     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (35)

1. M. Ajmone Marsan, G. Conte, and G. Balbo. A class of generalised stochastic Petri nets for the performance evaluation of multiprocessor systems. ACM Tr. on Comp. Sys., 2(2): 93-122, 1984.
2. A. Aziz, K. Sanwal, V. Singhal and R. Brayton. Verifying continuous time Markov chains. In GAV, LNCS 1102: 269-276, 1996.
3. C. Baier, B.R. Haverkort, H. Hermanns and J.-P. Katoen. Model checking continuous-time Markov chains by transient analysis. In CAV, LNCS 1855, 2000.
4. C. Baier, B.R. Haverkort, H. Hermanns and J.-P. Katoen. On the logical characterization of performability properties. In ICALP, LNCS 1853, 2000.
5. C. Baier, J.-P. Katoen and H. Hermanns. Approximate symbolic model checking of continuous-time Markov chains. In CONCUR, LNCS 1664: 146-162, 1999.
6. C. Baier and M. Kwiatkowska. On the verification of qualitative properties of probabilistic processes under fairness constraints. Inf. Proc. Letters, 66(2): 71-79, 1998.
7. M. Bernardo and R. Gorrieri. A tutorial on EMPA: A theory of concurrent processes with nondeterrninism, priorities, probabilities and time. Th. Comp. Sc., 2002: 1-54, 1998.
8. G. Clark, S. Gilmore, and J. Hillston. Specifying performance measures for PEPA. In ARTS, LNCS 1601: 211-227, 1999.
9. E.M. Clarke and R.P Kurshan. Computer-aided verification. IEEE Spectrum, 33(6): 61-67, 1996.
10. E.M. Clarke, O. Grumberg and D. Peled. Model Checking. MIT Press, 1999.
11. PR. D'Argenio, J.-P. Katoen, and E. Brinksma. Specification and analysis of soft real-time systems: Quantity and quality. In Proc. IEEE Real-Time Systems Symp., pp. 104-114, IEEE CS Press, 1999.
12. M. Diefenbruch, J. Hintelmann, B. Miiller-Clostermann. The QUEST-approach for the performance evemluation of SDL-systems. In Proc. Form. Descritpion Techn. IX, pp. 229-244, Chapman & Hall, 1996.
13. E.A. Emerson and C.-L. Lei. Temporal model checking under generalized fairness constraints. In Proc. Hawaii Int. Conf. on System Sc., pp. 277-288, 1985.
14. A. Fantechi, S. Gnesi and G. Ristori. Model checking for action-based logics. Form. Meth. in Sys. Design, 4: 187-203, 1994.
15. D. Ferrari. Considerations on the insularity of performance evaluation. IEEE Tr. on Softw. Eng., SE-12(6): 678-683, 1986.
16. N. Gotz, U. Herzog and M. Rettelbach. Multiprocessor and distributed system design: The integration of functional specification and performance analysis using stochastic process algebras. In Performance, LNCS 729: 121-146, 1993.
17. H. Hansson and B. Jonsson. A logic for reasoning about time and reliability. Form. Asp. of Comp., 6(5): 512-535, 1994.
18. C. Harvey. Performance engineering as integral part of system design. Br. Telecom Techn. J., 4:142-147, 1986.
19. M. Hennessy and R. Milner. Algebraic laws for nondeterminism and concurrency. J. of the ACM, 32(1): 137-161, 1985.
20. H. Hermanns. Interactive Markov Chains. PhD thesis, University of Erlangen- Niirnberg, 1998.
21. H. Hermanns, U. Herzog and J.-P. Katoen. Process algebra for performance evaluation. Th. Comp. Sci., 2001 (to appear).
22. H. Hermanns, U. Herzog, U. Klehmet, V. Mertsiotakis and M. Siegle. Compositional performance modelling with the TIPP tool. Performance Evaluation, 39(1-4): 5-35, 2000.
23. H. Hermanns, U. Herzog, and V. Mertsiotakis. Stochastic process algebras as a tool for performance and dependability modelling. In Proc. IEEE Int. Comp. Perf. and Dependability Symp., pages 102-111. IEEE CS Press, 1995.
24. H. Hermanns, J.-P. Katoen, J. Meyer-Kayser and M. Siegle. A Markov chain model checker. In TACAS, LNCS 1785:347-362, 2000.
25. H. Hermanns, J.-P. Katoen, J. Meyer-Kayser and M. Siegle. Model checking stochastic process algebra. Tech. Rep. IMMD 7-2/00, University of Erlangen-Niirnberg, 2000.
26. H. Hermanns and M. Siegle. Bisimulation algorithms for stochastic process algebras and their BDD-based implementation. In ARTS, LNCS 1601:244-265, 1999.
27. U. Herzog and V. Mertsiotakis. Applying stochastic process algebras to failure modelling. In Proc. Workshop on Process Algebra and Performance Modelling, pp. 107-126, Univ. Erlangen-Niirnberg, 1994.
28. U. Herzog. Formal description, time and performance analysis. In Entwurf und Betrieb Verteilter Systeme, IFB 264:172-190, Springer, 1990.
29. J. Hillston. A Compositional Approach to Performance Modelling. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
30. D. Kozen. Results on the propositional mu-calculus. Th. Comp. Sc., 27: 333-354, 1983.
31. K.G. Larsen and A. Skou. Bisimulation through probabilistic testing. Inf. and Comp., 94(1): 1-28, 1992.
32. R. Mateescu and M. Sighireanu. Efficient on-the-fly model checking for regular alternation-free mu-calculus. Proc. Workshop on Form. Meth. for Industrial Critical Sys., pp. 65-86. GMD/FOKUS, 2000.
33. R. De Nicola and F.W. Vaandrager. Action versus state based logics for transition systems. In Semantics of Concurrency, LNCS 469: 407-419, 1990.
34. R. De Nicola and F. W. Vaandrager. Three logics for branching bisimulation. J. of the ACM, 42(2): 458-487, 1995.
35. W. Stewart. Introduction to the Numerical Solution of Markov Chains. Princeton Univ. Press, 1994.