Aggarwal, S., Kurshan, R.P., et al., IFIP, WG 6.1, 3rd Int. Workshop on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification, North-Holland Publ., Amsterdam, 1983.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles

....is probably safe to say that symbolic execution in one form or another is at the core of most existing and planned automated protocol validation systems today. It is the basis of all CSP [10] and CCS like [15] evaluation systems, the Pandora algebraic validation system [11,12] the S R validator [1], temporal logic based systems such as the CarnegieMellon model checker [6] etc. The pitfalls of symbolic execution are equally well known: the size of the state space and the time it may take to inspect all reachable states in it can rise dramatically with the problem size [13] There are three ....

....problem) the set of reachable states in an exhaustive analysis is only 65. Given the definition of the alternating bit protocol, let us derive a description in terms of state vectors and transition rules. In Argos [13,14] a simple version of the protocol may look like: proc sender queue sender[1]; do : receiver msg1; do : sender ack1 break : sender ack0 skip : sender timeout receiver msg1 od; receiver msg0; do : sender ack0 break : sender ack1 skip : sender timeout receiver msg0 od od proc receiver queue receiver[1] do : ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Aggarwal, S., Kurshan, R.P., et al., IFIP, WG 6.1, 3rd Int. Workshop on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification, North-Holland Publ., Amsterdam, 1983.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC