Deriving symbolic representations from stochastic process algebras

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

Volumn 2399, Issue , 2002, Pages 207-208

  Kuntz, Matthias ^a   Siegle, Markus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGEBRA; BINARY DECISION DIAGRAMS; RANDOM PROCESSES; SEMANTICS;

CONSTRUCTION STEPS; DENOTATIONAL SEMANTICS; MARKOVIAN BISIMULATIONS; MULTI-TERMINAL BINARY DECISION DIAGRAMS; SOS SEMANTICS; STOCHASTIC PROCESS ALGEBRAS; SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATION;

STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

EID: 84943237509     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45605-8_12     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. R.I. Bahar, E.A. Frohm, C.M. Gaona, G.D. Hachtel, E. Macii, A. Pardo, and F. Somenzi. Algebraic Decision Diagrams and their Applications. Formal Methods in System Design, 10(2/3):171-206, April/May 1997.
2. M. Bernardo and R. Gorrieri. A Tutorial on EMPA: A Theory of Concurrent Processes with Nondeterminism, Priorities, Probabilities and Time. Theoretical Computer Science, 202:1-54, 1998.
3. H. Bohnenkamp. Kompositionelle Semantiken stochastischer Prozeßalgebren zur Erzeugung reduzierter Transitionssysteme. Master’s thesis, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Informatik 7, 1995 (in German).
4. A. Bouali and R. de Simone. Symbolic Bisimulation Minimisation. In Computer Aided Verification, pages 96-108, 1992. LNCS 663.
5. R.E. Bryant. Graph-based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-35(8):677-691, August 1986.
6. P. Buchholz. Exact and Ordinary Lumpability in Finite Markov Chains. Journal of Applied Probability, (31):59-75, 1994.
7. L. de Alfaro, M. Kwiatkowska, G. Norman, D. Parker, and R. Segala. Symbolic Model Checking for Probabilistic Processes using MTBDDs and the Kronecker Representation. In S. Graf and M. Schwartzbach, editors, TACAS 2000, LNCS 1785, pages 395-410, Berlin, 2000.
8. A. Dsouza and B. Bloom. Generating BDD models for process algebra terms. In Computer Aided Verification, pages 16-30, 1995. LNCS 939.
9. R. Enders, T. Filkorn, and D. Taubner. Generating BDDs for symbolic model checking in CCS. Distributed Computing, (6):155-164, 1993.
10. J.C. Fernandez. An Implementation of an Efficient Algorithm for Bisimulation Equivalence. Science of Computer Programming, 13:219-236, 1989.
11. M. Fujita, P. McGeer, and J.C.-Y. Yang. Multi-terminal Binary Decision Diagrams: An efficient data structure for matrix representation. Formal Methods in System Design, 10(2/3):149-169, April/May 1997.
12. N. Götz. Stochastische Prozeßalgebren-Integration von funktionalem Entwurf und Leistungsbewertung Verteilter Systeme. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 1994 (in German).
13. H. Hermanns, U. Herzog, and V. Mertsiotakis. Stochastic Process Algebras — Between LOTOS and Markov Chains. Computer Networks and ISDN (CNIS), 30(9-10):901-924, 1998.
14. H. Hermanns, J. Meyer-Kayser, and M. Siegle. Multi Terminal Binary Decision Diagrams to Represent and Analyse Continuous Time Markov Chains. In B. Plateau, W.J. Stewart, and M. Silva, editors, 3rd Int. Workshop on the Numerical Solution of Markov Chains, pages 188-207. Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza, 1999.
15. H. Hermanns and M. Rettelbach. Syntax, Semantics, Equivalences, and Axioms for MTIPP. In Proc. of PAPM’94, pages 71-88. Arbeitsberichte des IMMD 27 (4), Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 1994.
16. H. Hermanns and M. Siegle. Bisimulation Algorithms for Stochastic Process Algebras and their BDD-based Implementation. In J.-P. Katoen, editor, ARTS’99, 5th Int. AMAST Workshop on Real-Time and Probabilistic Systems, pages 144-264. Springer, LNCS 1601, 1999.
17. J. Hillston. A Compositional Approach to Performance Modelling. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
18. P. Kanellakis and S. Smolka. CCS Expressions, Finite State Processes, and Three Problems of Equivalence. Information and Computation, 86:43-68, 1990.
19. J.-P. Katoen, M. Kwiatkowska, G. Norman, and D. Parker. Faster and Symbolic CTMC Model Checking. In PAPM-PROBMIV 2001, pages 23-38. Springer, LNCS 2165, 2001.
20. M. Kuntz and M. Siegle. Deriving symbolic representations from stochastic process algebras. Tech. Rep. Informatik 7 03/02, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 2002.
21. M. Kwiatkowska, G. Norman, and D. Parker. PRISM: Probabilistic Symbolic Model Checker. In P. Kemper, editor, MMB-PNPM-PAPM-PROBMIV Tool Proceedings, pages 7-12. Univ. Dortmund, Informatik IV, Bericht 760/2001, 2001.
22. R. Milner. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, London, 1989.
23. R. Paige and R. Tarjan. Three Partition Refinement Algorithms. SIAM Journal of Computing, 16(6):973-989, 1987.
24. M. Rettelbach and M. Siegle. Compositional Minimal Semantics for the Stochastic Process Algebra TIPP. In Proc. of PAPM’94, pages 89-106. Arbeitsberichte des IMMD 27 (4), Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 1994.
25. M. Siegle. Compact representation of large performability models based on extended BDDs. In Fourth Int. Workshop on Performability Modeling of Computer and Communication Systems (PMCCS4), pages 77-80, Williamsburg, Sept. 1998.
26. M. Siegle. Compositional Representation and Reduction of Stochastic Labelled Transition Systems based on Decision Node BDDs. In D. Baum, N. Müller, and R. Rödler, editors, MMB’99, pages 173-185, Trier, September 1999. VDE Verlag.
27. M. Siegle. Advances in model representation. In L. de Alfaro and S. Gilmore, editors, Process Algebra and Probabilistic Methods, Joint Int. Workshop PAPMPROBMIV 2001, pages 1-22. Springer, LNCS 2165, September 2001.
28. R. Sisto. A method to build symbolic representations of LOTOS specifications. In Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification, pages 323-338, 1995.
29. A. Xie and P.A. Beerel. Implicit Enumeration of Strongly Connected Components. In ICCAD’99, pages 37-40. IEEE, 1999.