Skip to main content

Petri Net Model Checking with LoLA 2

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Application and Theory of Petri Nets and Concurrency (PETRI NETS 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 10877))

Abstract

LoLA 2 offers a suite of algorithms for verifying place/transition Petri nets. It combines structural with state space methods and general purpose with Petri net-specific techniques. The methods are easily accessible to people with little knowledge of Petri nets since there is a uniform query language based on temporal logic, and the tool takes care of sound application of its methods. Unlike its predecessor LoLA 1, LoLA 2 is based on a strict modularisation and integration of various standard tools. A careful software engineering approach has been used for coding. Through its code quality and its frequent comparison to other tools in the yearly model checking contests, LoLA 2 has become one of the most reliable verification tools for distributed systems.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
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

References

  1. Best, E., Schlachter, U.: Analysis of Petri nets and transition systems. In: Proceedings ICE. EPTCS, vol. 189, pp. 53–67 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Das, D., Chakrabarti, P.P., Kumar, R.: Functional verification of task partitioning for multiprocessor embedded systems. ACM Trans. Des. Autom. Electron. Syst. 12(4), 44 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Decker, G., Overdick, H., Weske, M.: Oryx – an open modeling platform for the BPM community. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 382–385. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85758-7_29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: An extensible SAT-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 502–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24605-3_37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Emerson, E.A., Clarke, E.M.: Using branching time temporal logic to synthesize synchronization skeletons. Sci. Comput. Program. 2(3), 241–266 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dalsgaard, A.E., et al.: Extended dependency graphs and efficient distributed fixed-point computation. In: van der Aalst, W., Best, E. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10258, pp. 139–158. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57861-3_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Dill, D.L., Knapp, M.A., Gage, P., Talcott, C., Laderoute, K., Lincoln, P.: The pathalyzer: a tool for analysis of signal transduction pathways. In: Eskin, E., Ideker, T., Raphael, B., Workman, C. (eds.) RRG/RSB-2005. LNCS, vol. 4023, pp. 11–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-48540-7_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Kordon, F., et al.: Homepage of the Model Checking Contest, June 2017. http://mcc.lip6.fr/

  9. Billington, J., et al.: The Petri net markup language: concepts, technology, and tools. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Best, E. (eds.) ICATPN 2003. LNCS, vol. 2679, pp. 483–505. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44919-1_31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Cardozo, N., et al.: Modeling and analyzing self-adaptive systems with context Petri nets. In: Proceedings of the TASE, pp. 191–198. IEEE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Geldenhuys, J., Valmari, A.: More efficient on-the-fly LTL verification with Tarjan’s algorithm. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 345(1), 60–82 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Gerth, R., Kuiper, R., Peled, D.A., Penczek, W.: A partial order approach to branching time logic model checking. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Theory of Computing and Systems, ISTCS 1995, Tel Aviv, Israel, 4–6 January 1995, pp. 130–139. IEEE Computer Society (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Heiner, M., Richter, R., Schwarick, M.: Snoopy - a tool to design and animate/simulate graph-based formalisms. In: Proceedings of the PNTAP (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Huffman, D.A.: A method for the construction of minimum-redundancy codes. Proc. IRE 40, 1098–1101 (1952)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Junttila, T.A.: Computational complexity of the place/transition-net symmetry reduction method. J. UCS 7(4), 307–326 (2001)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Kaiser, A., Kroening, D., Wahl, T.: Dynamic cutoff detection in parameterized concurrent programs. In: Touili, T., Cook, B., Jackson, P. (eds.) CAV 2010. LNCS, vol. 6174, pp. 645–659. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14295-6_55

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Karp, R.M., Miller, R.E.: Parallel program schemata. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 3(2), 147–195 (1969)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Knuth, D.E.: Efficient representation of perm groups. Combinatorica 11(1), 33–43 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Kristensen, L.M., Mailund, T.: A generalised sweep-line method for safety properties. In: Eriksson, L.-H., Lindsay, P.A. (eds.) FME 2002. LNCS, vol. 2391, pp. 549–567. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45614-7_31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Kristensen, L.M., Schmidt, K., Valmari, A.: Question-guided stubborn set methods for state properties. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 29(3), 215–251 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Schmidt, K.: Automated generation of a progress measure for the sweep-line method. STTT 8(3), 195–203 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kummer, O., Wienberg, F.: Renew - the reference net workshop. In: Petri Net Newsletter, pp. 12–16 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lohmann, N., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Reisig, W.: Analyzing BPEL4Chor: verification and participant synthesis. In: Dumas, M., Heckel, R. (eds.) WS-FM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4937, pp. 46–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79230-7_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Lohmann, N., Massuthe, P., Stahl, C., Weinberg, D.: Analyzing interacting WS-BPEL processes using flexible model generation. Data Knowl. Eng. 64(1), 38–54 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lohmann, N., Verbeek, E., Ouyang, C., Stahl, C.: Comparing and evaluating Petri net semantics for BPEL. IJBPIM 4(1), 60–73 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Meis, B., Bergenthum, R., Desel, J.: travis - an online tool for the synthesis and analysis of Petri nets with final states. In: van der Aalst, W., Best, E. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10258, pp. 101–111. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57861-3_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Mrasek, R., Mülleand, J., Böhm, K., Becker, M., Allmann, C.: Property specification, process verification, and reporting - a case study with vehicle-commissioning processes. Inf. Syst. 56(C), 326–346 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Niewiadomski, A., Wolf, K.: LoLA as abstract planning engine of PlanICS. In: Proceedings of the PNSEi. CEUR, vol. 1160, pp. 349–350 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Oanea, O., Wimmel, H., Wolf, K.: New algorithms for deciding the Siphon-Trap property. In: Lilius, J., Penczek, W. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6128, pp. 267–286. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13675-7_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Oddoux, D., Gastin, P.: LTL 2 BA: fast translation from LTL formulae to Büchi automata. http://www.lsv.fr/~gastin/ltl2ba/

  31. Schmidt, K.: LoLA wird Pfadfinder. In: Proceedings of the AWPN, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, p. 26 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Schmidt, K.: Stubborn sets for standard properties. In: Donatelli, S., Kleijn, J. (eds.) ICATPN 1999. LNCS, vol. 1639, pp. 46–65. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48745-X_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Schmidt, K.: How to calculate symmetries of Petri nets. Acta Inf. 36(7), 545–590 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Schmidt, K.: Integrating low level symmetries into reachability analysis. In: Graf, S., Schwartzbach, M. (eds.) TACAS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1785, pp. 315–330. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46419-0_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Schmidt, K.: LoLA: a low level analyser. In: Nielsen, M., Simpson, D. (eds.) ICATPN 2000. LNCS, vol. 1825, pp. 465–474. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44988-4_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Schmidt, K.: Using Petri net invariants in state space construction. In: Garavel, H., Hatcliff, J. (eds.) TACAS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2619, pp. 473–488. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36577-X_35

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Stahl, C., Reisig, W., Krstic, M.: Hazard detection in a GALS wrapper: a case study. In: Proceedings of the ACSD, pp. 234–243. IEEE (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Tarjan, R.E.: Depth-first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM J. Comput. 1(2), 146–160 (1972)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Tarjan, R.E.: Efficiency of a good but not linear set union algorithm. J. ACM 22(2), 215–225 (1975)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. Valmari, A.: Stubborn sets for reduced state space generation. In: Rozenberg, G. (ed.) ICATPN 1989. LNCS, vol. 483, pp. 491–515. Springer, Heidelberg (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-53863-1_36

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Valmari, A.: The state explosion problem. In: Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ACPN 1996. LNCS, vol. 1491, pp. 429–528. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-65306-6_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. van der Aalst, W.M.P., et al.: ProM: the process mining toolkit. In: Proceedings of the BPMDemos. CEUR, vol. 489 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Vergauwen, B., Lewi, J.: A linear local model checking algorithm for CTL. In: Best, E. (ed.) CONCUR 1993. LNCS, vol. 715, pp. 447–461. Springer, Heidelberg (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-57208-2_31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Wimmel, H., Wolf, K.: Applying CEGAR to the Petri net state equation. Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 8(3) (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wolf, K.: Running LoLA 2.0 in a model checking competition. In: Koutny, M., Desel, J., Kleijn, J. (eds.) Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency XI. LNCS, vol. 9930, pp. 274–285. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53401-4_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karsten Wolf .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Wolf, K. (2018). Petri Net Model Checking with LoLA 2. In: Khomenko, V., Roux, O. (eds) Application and Theory of Petri Nets and Concurrency. PETRI NETS 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10877. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91268-4_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91268-4_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91267-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91268-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics