#### DMCA

## PRISM: Probabilistic symbolic model checker (2002)

### Cached

### Download Links

Citations: | 231 - 13 self |

### Citations

1475 |
Symbolic Model Checking
- McMillan
- 1986
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...f structured probabilistic models can be constructed using MTBDDs. Reachability analysis using BDDs forms the basis of non-probabilistic symbolic model checking which has proven to be very successful =-=[9,23]-=-. For both PCTL and CSL, model checking generally reduces to a combination of reachability-based computation and the solution of linear equation systemssor linear optimisation problems. Again, reachab... |

749 | Symbolic Model Checking: 1020 States and Beyond
- Burch, Clarke, et al.
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...f structured probabilistic models can be constructed using MTBDDs. Reachability analysis using BDDs forms the basis of non-probabilistic symbolic model checking which has proven to be very successful =-=[9,23]-=-. For both PCTL and CSL, model checking generally reduces to a combination of reachability-based computation and the solution of linear equation systemssor linear optimisation problems. Again, reachab... |

332 |
Symbolic model checking: 10 states and beyond
- Burch, Clarke, et al.
- 1992
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ther information on the language, see www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~dxp/prism Reachability analysis using BDDs forms the basis of non-probabilistic symbolic model checking which has proven to be very successful =-=[11, 24]-=-. For both PCTL and CSL, model checking generally reduces to a combination of reachability-based computation (manipulation of sets of states) and the solution of linear equation systems or linear opti... |

323 | Reactive modules
- Alur, Henzinger
- 1996
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...the long run, the chance that the queue is not full is greater than or equal to 0.98”. 3 The Tool PRISM takes as input a description of a system written in a probabilistic variant of Reactive Modules =-=[1]-=- 1 . It first constructs the model from this description and computes the set of reachable states. The model can be a DTMC, MDP 1 For further information on the language, see www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~dxp/pr... |

284 | Model checking of probabilistic and nondeterministic systems
- Bianco, Alfaro
- 1995
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ition from state s to s ′ , with the interpretation that the probability of moving from s to s ′ within t(∈ R >0 ) time units is 1 − e−ρ(s,s′ )·t . Probabilistic specification formalisms include PCTL =-=[14,8,7]-=-, a probabilistic extension of the temporal logic CTL applicable in the context of MDPs, and the logic CSL [6], a specification language for CTMCs based on CTL and PCTL. PCTL allows us to express prop... |

184 |
Multiterminal binary decision diagrams: an efficient data structure for matrix representation
- Fujita, McGeer, et al.
- 1997
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...rmed using BDDs. In the case of numerical computation, however, PRISM supports three different model checking engines. The first is based on symbolic model checking using MTBDDs (multi-terminal BDDs) =-=[11]-=-; more details can be found in [5,13]. The second uses more conventional data structures for numerical analysis: sparse matrices and full vectors. The latter engine nearly always provides faster numer... |

156 | Approximate symbolic model checking of continuous-time Markov chains
- Baier, Katoen, et al.
- 1999
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...s 1 − e −ρ(s,s′ )·t . Probabilistic specification formalisms include PCTL [16,10,9], a probabilistic extension of the temporal logic CTL applicable in the context of MDPs and DTMCs, and the logic CSL =-=[8]-=-, a specification language for CTMCs based on CTL and PCTL. PCTL allows us to express properties of the form “under any scheduling of processes, the probability that event A occurs is at least p (at m... |

134 | Fast randomized consensus using shared memory
- Aspnes, Herlihy
- 1990
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... have considered several randomised distributed algorithms, including randomised mutual exclusion protocols [26,25], a randomized Byzantine agreement protocol [10] and a randomised consensus protocol =-=[2]-=-. In the latter case, we were able to verify quantitative PCTL properties for MDPs with up to 10 10 states using the MTBDD engine [22]. We have also considered a number of CTMC models. These include a... |

131 | Model checking for a probabilistic branching time logic with fairness
- Baier, Kwiatkowska
- 1998
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ition from state s to s ′ , with the interpretation that the probability of moving from s to s ′ within t(∈ R >0 ) time units is 1 − e−ρ(s,s′ )·t . Probabilistic specification formalisms include PCTL =-=[14,8,7]-=-, a probabilistic extension of the temporal logic CTL applicable in the context of MDPs, and the logic CSL [6], a specification language for CTMCs based on CTL and PCTL. PCTL allows us to express prop... |

97 | Symbolic model checking for probabilistic processes
- Baier, Clarke, et al.
- 1997
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...erical computation, however, PRISM supports three different model checking engines. The first is based on symbolic model checking using MTBDDs (multi-terminal BDDs) [11]; more details can be found in =-=[5,13]-=-. The second uses more conventional data structures for numerical analysis: sparse matrices and full vectors. The latter engine nearly always provides faster numerical computation than its MTBDD count... |

93 | Symmetry breaking in distributed networks
- Itai, Rodeh
- 1990
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...of the form “under any scheduling of processes, the probability that event A occurs is at least p (at most p)”. By way of illustration, we consider an asynchronous randomized leader election protocol =-=[20]-=-, where the processors of an asynchronous ring make random choices based on coin tosses in an attempt to elect a leader. Using the atomic proposition leader to label states in which a leader has been ... |

89 | Model checking continuous-time markov chains by transient analyisis
- Baier, Havekort, et al.
- 2000
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...time units is 1 − e−ρ(s,s′ )·t . Probabilistic specification formalisms include PCTL [14,8,7], a probabilistic extension of the temporal logic CTL applicable in the context of MDPs, and the logic CSL =-=[6]-=-, a specification language for CTMCs based on CTL and PCTL. PCTL allows us to express properties of the form “under any scheduling of processes, the probability that event A occurs is at least p (at m... |

78 |
A logic for reasoning about time and probability
- Hansen, Jonsson
- 1994
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ition from state s to s ′ , with the interpretation that the probability of moving from s to s ′ within t(∈ R >0 ) time units is 1 − e−ρ(s,s′ )·t . Probabilistic specification formalisms include PCTL =-=[14,8,7]-=-, a probabilistic extension of the temporal logic CTL applicable in the context of MDPs, and the logic CSL [6], a specification language for CTMCs based on CTL and PCTL. PCTL allows us to express prop... |

69 | Implementation of Symbolic Model Checking for Probabilistic Systems - Parker - 2002 |

67 | On algorithmic verification methods for probabilistic systems
- Baier
- 1998
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...TL or CSL depending on the model type. The tool then performs model checking to determine which states of the system satisfy each specification. For PCTL properties PRISM implements the algorithms of =-=[14,8,7,3]-=-. For CSL, methods based on [6,21] are used. It is also possible to export the transition matrix of the model, enabling analysis in other applications and visualisation of the model. Fig. 1 shows the ... |

61 | How to specify and verify the long-run average behavior of probabilistic systems - Alfaro - 1998 |

61 |
Stochastic Petri net models of polling systems
- Ibe, Trivedi
- 1990
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...e were able to verify quantitative PCTL properties for MDPs with up to 10 10 states using the MTBDD engine [22]. We have also considered a number of CTMC models. These include a cyclic polling system =-=[19]-=-, tandem queueing network [18] and workstation cluster [15]. For example, in the workstation cluster case study, we have used the hybrid engine in PRISM to verify the property “the chance that the qua... |

60 | Multi terminal binary decision diagrams to represent and analyse continuous time Markov chains
- Hermanns, Kayser, et al.
- 1999
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...tive PCTL properties for MDPs with up to 10 10 states using the MTBDD engine [22]. We have also considered a number of CTMC models. These include a cyclic polling system [19], tandem queueing network =-=[18]-=- and workstation cluster [15]. For example, in the workstation cluster case study, we have used the hybrid engine in PRISM to verify the property “the chance that the quality of service drops below mi... |

57 | A Markov chain model checker
- Hermanns, Katoen, et al.
- 2000
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ons and instead support steady-state and transient analysis. Of the two probabilistic model checking tools that we are aware of, ProbVerus [4] only supports DTMCs and a subset of PCTL, whereas E⊢MC 2 =-=[17]-=- only supports the model checking of CTMCs using CSL specifications. PRISM is the only model checking tool which allows the quantitative model checking of MDPs. The development of PRISM is an ongoing ... |

54 |
Verification of Multiprocess Probabilistic Protocols
- Pnueli, Zuck
- 1986
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...M to build and analyse probabilistic models for a number of case studies. For MDP models, we have considered several randomised distributed algorithms, including randomised mutual exclusion protocols =-=[26,25]-=-, a randomized Byzantine agreement protocol [10] and a randomised consensus protocol [2]. In the latter case, we were able to verify quantitative PCTL properties for MDPs with up to 10 10 states using... |

53 | Compositional performance modelling with TIPPTool
- Hermanns, Herzog, et al.
- 1998
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...e probabilistic systems which supports two types of models (MDPs and CTMCs) and two probabilistic logics (PCTL and CSL). Several CTMC analysis tools are available, for example MARCA [28] and TIPPtool =-=[16]-=-, which do not allow logic specifications and instead support steady-state and transient analysis. Of the two probabilistic model checking tools that we are aware of, ProbVerus [4] only supports DTMCs... |

52 | On the logical characterisation of performability properties - Baier, Haverkort, et al. - 2000 |

44 | Faster and symbolic CTMC model checking
- Katoen, Kwiatkowska, et al.
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... The tool then performs model checking to determine which states of the system satisfy each specification. For PCTL properties PRISM implements the algorithms of [14,8,7,3]. For CSL, methods based on =-=[6,21]-=- are used. It is also possible to export the transition matrix of the model, enabling analysis in other applications and visualisation of the model. Fig. 1 shows the structure of the tool and Fig. 2 s... |

38 | Symbolic model checking of concurrent probabilistic processes using MTBDDs and the Kronecker representation
- Alfaro, Kwiatkowska, et al.
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...tem Architecture Fig. 2. The PRISM User Interface Results (States/Probabilities) In PRISM, model construction and reachability are implemented using MTBDDs and BDDs respectively. It has been shown in =-=[13]-=- that space efficient representations of structured probabilistic models can be constructed using MTBDDs. Reachability analysis using BDDs forms the basis of non-probabilistic symbolic model checking ... |

37 |
On the use of model checking techniques for dependability evaluation
- Haverkort, Hermanns, et al.
- 2000
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... with up to 10 10 states using the MTBDD engine [22]. We have also considered a number of CTMC models. These include a cyclic polling system [19], tandem queueing network [18] and workstation cluster =-=[15]-=-. For example, in the workstation cluster case study, we have used the hybrid engine in PRISM to verify the property “the chance that the quality of service drops below minimum quality within 85 time ... |

32 | Trivedi K.: ‘Loss formulas and their application to optimization for cellular networks
- Haring, Marie, et al.
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ependability and quality of service properties for a range of systems, including randomized distributed algorithms [2], polling systems [22], workstation clusters [18] and wireless cell communication =-=[17]-=-. 1 Introduction Probability is widely used in the design and analysis of software and hardware systems: as a means to derive efficient algorithms (e.g. the use of electronic coin flipping and randomn... |

31 |
n-process mutual exclusion with bounded waiting by 4 · log n-valued shared variable
- Rabin
- 1982
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...M to build and analyse probabilistic models for a number of case studies. For MDP models, we have considered several randomised distributed algorithms, including randomised mutual exclusion protocols =-=[26,25]-=-, a randomized Byzantine agreement protocol [10] and a randomised consensus protocol [2]. In the latter case, we were able to verify quantitative PCTL properties for MDPs with up to 10 10 states using... |

26 |
V.: Random oracles in constantipole: practical asynchronous byzantine agreement using cryptography (extended abstract
- Cachin, Kursawe, et al.
- 2000
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...umber of case studies. For MDP models, we have considered several randomised distributed algorithms, including randomised mutual exclusion protocols [26,25], a randomized Byzantine agreement protocol =-=[10]-=- and a randomised consensus protocol [2]. In the latter case, we were able to verify quantitative PCTL properties for MDPs with up to 10 10 states using the MTBDD engine [22]. We have also considered ... |

26 | R.: Automated verification of a randomized distributed consensus protocol using Cadence
- Kwiatkowska, Norman, et al.
- 2001
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...antine agreement protocol [10] and a randomised consensus protocol [2]. In the latter case, we were able to verify quantitative PCTL properties for MDPs with up to 10 10 states using the MTBDD engine =-=[22]-=-. We have also considered a number of CTMC models. These include a cyclic polling system [19], tandem queueing network [18] and workstation cluster [15]. For example, in the workstation cluster case s... |

14 |
CUDD: CU Decision Diagram package. Public software
- Somenzi
- 1997
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... and C++. All high-level parts of the tool, such as the user interface and parsers are written in Java. Lowlevel code and libraries are mostly in C++. For BDDs and MTBDDs, PRISM uses the CUDD package =-=[27]-=-, which is written in C. 4 Results We have used PRISM to build and analyse probabilistic models for a number of case studies. For MDP models, we have considered several randomised distributed algorith... |

11 |
On the use of Kronecker operators for the solution of generalized stocastic Petri nets
- Ciardo, Tilgner
- 1996
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...states using the MTBDD engine [23]. We have also considered a number of CTMC models. These include a cyclic polling system [22], a tandem queueing network [21], a kanban flexible manufacturing system =-=[12]-=-, a workstation cluster [18] and a cell of a wireless communication network [17]. For example, in the workstation cluster case study, we have used the hybrid engine in PRISM to verify the property “th... |

11 |
On algorithmic veri methods for probabilistic systems. Habilitation thesis
- Baier
- 1998
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...hich states of the system satisfy each specication. For PCTL properties and DTMC or MDP models, PRISM implements the algorithms of [16, 10, 9] (including fairness) and the subsequent improvements of [=-=3]-=-. For CSL and CTMCs, methods based on [7] are used. It is also possible to export the transition matrix of the model, enabling analysis in other applications and visualisation of the model. Fig. 1 sho... |

9 | On the semantic foundations of Probabilistic VERUS
- Baier, Clarke, et al.
- 1999
(Show Context)
Citation Context ... [28] and TIPPtool [16], which do not allow logic specifications and instead support steady-state and transient analysis. Of the two probabilistic model checking tools that we are aware of, ProbVerus =-=[4]-=- only supports DTMCs and a subset of PCTL, whereas E⊢MC 2 [17] only supports the model checking of CTMCs using CSL specifications. PRISM is the only model checking tool which allows the quantitative m... |

8 |
Automated veri of a randomized distributed consensus protocol using Cadence SMV and PRISM
- Kwiatkowska, Norman, et al.
- 2001
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ion protocols of [27, 26] and the randomised consensus protocol of [2]. In the latter case, we were able to verify quantitative PCTL properties for MDPs with up to 10 10 states using the MTBDD engine =-=[23]-=-. We have also considered a number of CTMC models. These include a cyclic polling system [22], a tandem queueing network [21], a kanbansexible manufacturing system [12], a workstation cluster [18] and... |

1 |
MARCA: Marcov chain analyzer. a software package for Markov modelling
- Stewart
- 1991
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...o build and analyse probabilistic systems which supports two types of models (MDPs and CTMCs) and two probabilistic logics (PCTL and CSL). Several CTMC analysis tools are available, for example MARCA =-=[28]-=- and TIPPtool [16], which do not allow logic specifications and instead support steady-state and transient analysis. Of the two probabilistic model checking tools that we are aware of, ProbVerus [4] o... |