Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On Combining Functional Verification and Performance Evaluation Using CADP

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
FME 2002:Formal Methods—Getting IT Right (FME 2002)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2391))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Considering functional correctness and performance evaluation in a common framework is desirable, both for scientific and economic reasons. In this paper, we describe how the Cadp toolbox, originally designed for verifying the functional correctness of Lotos specifications, can also be used for performance evaluation. We illustrate the proposed approach by the performance study of the Scsi-2 bus arbitration protocol.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A. Marsan, G. Balbo, and G. Conte. A Class of Generalized Stochastic Petri Nets for the Performance Evaluation of Multiprocessor Systems. ACM Trans. on Comp. Sys., 2(2), 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  2. ANSI. Small Computer System Interface-2. Standard X3.131-1994, American National Standards Institute, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. Bernardo, W.R. Cleaveland, S.T. Sims, and W.J. Stewart. TwoTowers: A Tool Integrating Functional and Performance Analysis of Concurrent Systems. In Proc. FORTE’98, IFIP, North-Holland, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. Bernardo and R. Gorrieri. A Tutorial on EMPA: A Theory of Concurrent Processes with Nondeterminism, Priorities, Probabilities and Time. Th. Comp. Sci., 202:1–54, 1998.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. D. Bert. Preuve de propriétés d’équité en B: Preuve de l’algorithme d’arbitrage du bus SCSI-3. In Proc. AFADL’2001 (Nancy, France), pages 221–241, June 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  6. L. Blair, G. Blair, and A. Andersen. Separating Functional Behaviour and Performance Constraints: Aspect-Oriented Specification. Technical Report MPG-98-07, Computing Department, Lancaster University, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  7. T. Bolognesi and E. Brinksma. Introduction to the ISO Specification Language LOTOS. Comp. Netw. and ISDN Sys., 14(1):25–59, 1988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. P. Buchholz, G. Ciardo, S. Donatelli, and P. Kemper. Complexity of memory-efficient Kronecker operations with applications to the solution of Markov models. INFORMS J. on Comp., 13(3):203–222, 2000.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. L. de Alfaro. How to specify and verify the long-run average behavior of probabilistic systems. In Proc. Symp. on Logic in Computer Science, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  10. D. Ferrari. Considerations on the Insularity of Performance Evaluation. IEEE Trans. on Softw. Eng., SE-12(6):678–683, June 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  11. H. Garavel. Compilation of LOTOS abstract data types. In Proc. FORTE’89, pages 147–162. IFIP, North-Holland, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  12. H. Garavel and F. Lang. SVL: A Scripting Language for Compositional Verification. In Proc. FORTE’2001, pages 377–392. IFIP, Kluwer Academic, 2001. Full version available as INRIA Research Report RR-4223.

    Google Scholar 

  13. H. Garavel and J. Sifakis. Compilation and verification of LOTOS specifications. In Proc. PSTV’90, pages 379–394. IFIP, North-Holland, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. S. Gilmore and J. Hillston. The PEPA Workbench: A Tool to Support a Process Algebra-Based Approach to Performance Modelling. In Proc. TOOLS’94, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  15. N. Götz, U. Herzog, and M. Rettelbach. Multiprocessor and distributed system design: The integration of functional specification and performance analysis using stochastic process algebras. In Tutorial Proc. PERFORMANCE’ 93. Springer, LNCS 729, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  16. S. Graf, B. Steffen, and G. Luettgen. Compositional Minimization of Finite State Systems. Formal Asp. of Comp., 8(5):607–616, 1996.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. H. Garavel, F. Lang, and R. Mateescu. An Overview of CADP 2001. INRIA Technical Report RT-254, December 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J.F. Groote and J. van de Pol. State space reduction using partial τ-confluence. In Proc. MFCS’2000, pages 383–393. Springer, LNCS 1893, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  19. H. Hermanns. Interactive Markov Chains. PhD thesis, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 1998. revised version to appear as Springer LNCS monograph.

    Google Scholar 

  20. H. Hermanns, U. Herzog, and J.-P. Katoen. Process algebra for performance evaluation. Th. Comp. Sci., 274(1–2):43–87, 2002.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. H. Hermanns, U. Herzog, U. Klehmet, V. Mertsiotakis, and M. Siegle. Compositional performance modelling with the TIPPtool. Perf. Eval., 39(1–4):5–35, January 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  22. H. Hermanns, J.-P. Katoen, J. Meyer-Kayser, and M. Siegle. A Markov Chain Model Checker. In Proc. TACAS’2000, pages 347–362, Springer, LNCS 1785, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  23. H. Hermanns and J.P. Katoen. Automated compositional Markov chain generation for a plain-old telephony system. Sci. of Comp. Prog., 36(1):97–127, 2000.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. O. Hjiej, A. Benzekri, and A. Valderruten. From Annotated LOTOS specifications to Queueing Networks: Automating Performance Models Derivation. Decentralized and Distributed Systems (North Holland), 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. Hillston. The Nature of Synchronisation. In Proc. PAPM’94, Arbeitsberichte des IMMD, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg. pages 51–70, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J. Hillston. A Compositional Approach to Performance Modelling. Cambridge University Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  27. ISO/IEC. LOTOS — A Formal Description Technique based on the Temporal Ordering of Observational Behaviour. International Standard 8807, ISO-Information Processing Systems-Open Systems Interconnection, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  28. ISO/IEC. Enhancements to LOTOS (E-LOTOS). International Standard 15437:2001, ISO-Information Technology, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  29. A. Marsan, A. Bianco, L. Ciminiera, R. Sisto, and A. Valenzano. A LOTOS Extension for the Performance Analysis of Distributed Systems. IEEE/ACM Trans, on Networking, 2(2), 151–164, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. M. Kwiatkowska, G. Norman, and D. Parker. Probabilistic Symbolic Model Checking with PRISM: A Hybrid Approach. In Proc. TACAS’2002, pages 52–66, 2002, Springer LNCS 2280.

    Google Scholar 

  31. F. Lang. Compositional Verification using SVL Scripts. In Proc. TACAS’2002, pages 465–469, 2002, Springer LNCS 2280.

    Google Scholar 

  32. M.F. Neuts. Matrix-geometric Solutions in Stochastic Models-An Algorithmic Approach. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  33. M.L. Puterman. Markov Decision Processes. John Wiley, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  34. W.J. Stewart. Introduction to the numerical solution of Markov chains. Princeton University Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  35. K. J. Turner, editor. Using Formal Description Techniques-An Introduction to ESTELLE, LOTOS, and SDL. John Wiley, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  36. C. Vissers, G. Scollo, M. van Sinderen, and E. Brinksma. Specification styles in distributed systems design and verification. Th. Comp. Sci., 89(1):179–206, 1991.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. M. Zendri. Studio ed implementazione di un modello del bus SCSI. Laurea thesis, Politecnico di Milano, Facoltà di Ingegneria, Dip. di Elettronica, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INRIA Rhône-Alpes / VASY, 655, avenue de l’Europe, F-38330, Montbonnot Saint-Martin, France

    Hubert Garavel

  2. Formal Methods and Tools Group, University of Twente, P.O. Box 217, NL-7500 AE, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Holger Hermanns

Authors
  1. Hubert Garavel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Holger Hermanns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University, P.O. Box 337, 751 05, Uppsala, Sweden

    Lars-Henrik Eriksson

  2. Software Verification Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Queensland, 4072, Australia

    Peter Alexander Lindsay

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Garavel, H., Hermanns, H. (2002). On Combining Functional Verification and Performance Evaluation Using CADP. In: Eriksson, LH., Lindsay, P.A. (eds) FME 2002:Formal Methods—Getting IT Right. FME 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2391. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45614-7_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45614-7_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43928-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45614-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation