On the Efficient Computation of the Minimal Coverability Set for Petri Nets

  • Gilles Geeraerts
  • Jean-François Raskin
  • Laurent Van Begin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4762)


The minimal coverability set (MCS) of a Petri net is a finite representation of the downward-closure of its reachable markings. The minimal coverability set allows to decide several important problems like coverability, semi-liveness, place boundedness, etc. The classical algorithm to compute the MCS constructs the Karp&Miller tree [8]. Unfortunately the K&M tree is often huge, even for small nets. An improvement of this K&M algorithm is the Minimal Coverability Tree (MCT) algorithm [1], which has been introduced 15 years ago, and implemented since then in several tools such as Pep [7]. Unfortunately, we show in this paper that the MCT is flawed: it might compute an under-approximation of the reachable markings. We propose a new solution for the efficient computation of the MCS of Petri nets. Our experimental results show that this new algorithm behaves much better in practice than the K&M algorithm.


Covering Sequence Monotonicity Property Recursive Call Label Tree Strict Monotonicity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Finkel, A.: The minimal coverability graph for Petri nets. In: Rozenberg, G. (ed.) Advances in Petri Nets 1993. LNCS, vol. 674, pp. 210–243. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Finkel, A., Geeraerts, G., Raskin, J.F., Van Begin, L.: A counter-example to the minimal coverability tree algorithm. Technical Report 535, Université Libre de Bruxelles (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Geeraerts, G.: Coverability and Expressiveness Properties of Well-structured Transition Systems. PhD thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Geeraerts, G., Raskin, J.F., Van Begin, L.: Well-structured languages. Act. Inf. 44(3-4)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Geeraerts, G., Raskin, J.F., Van Begin, L.: On the efficient computation of the minimal coverability set for Petri nets. Technical Report CFV 2007.81Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    German, S., Sistla, A.: Reasoning about Systems with Many Processes. J. ACM 39(3) (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grahlmann, B.: The PEP tool. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 440–443. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karp, R.M., Miller, R.E.: Parallel Program Schemata. JCSS 3, 147–195 (1969)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luttge, K.: Zustandsgraphen von Petri-Netzen. Master’s thesis, Humboldt-Universität (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reisig, W.: Petri Nets. An introduction. Springer, Heidelberg (1986)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Starke, P.: Personal communicationGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van Begin, L.: Efficient Verification of Counting Abstractions for Parametric systems. PhD thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gilles Geeraerts
    • 1
  • Jean-François Raskin
    • 1
  • Laurent Van Begin
    • 1
  1. 1.Université Libre de Bruxelles (U.L.B.), Computer Science Department, CPI 212, Campus Plaine, Boulevard du Triomphe, B-1050 BruxellesBelgium

Personalised recommendations