fond
Model Checking Contest 2020
10th edition, Paris, France, June 23, 2020
2019-Gold compared to other tools («Known» models, LTLCardinality)
Last Updated
Jun 28, 2020

Introduction

This page presents how 2019-Gold do cope efficiently with the LTLCardinality examination face to the other participating tools. In this page, we consider «Known» models.

The next sections will show chart comparing performances in terms of both memory and execution time.The x-axis corresponds to the challenging tool where the y-axes represents 2019-Gold' performances. Thus, points below the diagonal of a chart denote comparisons favorables to the tool while others corresponds to situations where the challenging tool performs better.

You might also find plots out of the range that denote the case were at least one tool could not answer appropriately (error, time-out, could not compute or did not competed).

2019-Gold versus GreatSPN

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 2036 runs (1018 for 2019-Gold and 1018 for GreatSPN, so there are 1018 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing 2019-Gold to GreatSPN are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  2019-Gold GreatSPN Both tools   2019-Gold GreatSPN
All computed OK 568 14 125   Smallest Memory Footprint
2019-Gold = GreatSPN 8 Times tool wins 834 123
2019-Gold > GreatSPN 187   Shortest Execution Time
2019-Gold < GreatSPN 55 Times tool wins 706 251
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 2 168 2  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 13 401 58


On the chart below, denote cases where the two tools did computed all results without error, denote cases where the two tool did computed the same number of values (but not al values in the examination), denote cases where 2019-Gold computed more values than GreatSPN, denote cases where 2019-Gold computed less values than GreatSPN, denote the cases where at least one tool did not competed, denote the cases where at least one tool computed a bad value and denote the cases where at least one tool stated it could not compute a result or timed-out.

2019-Gold wins when points are below the diagonal, GreatSPN wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

2019-Gold versus ITS-Tools

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 2036 runs (1018 for 2019-Gold and 1018 for ITS-Tools, so there are 1018 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing 2019-Gold to ITS-Tools are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  2019-Gold ITS-Tools Both tools   2019-Gold ITS-Tools
All computed OK 2 34 220   Smallest Memory Footprint
2019-Gold = ITS-Tools 5 Times tool wins 615 362
2019-Gold > ITS-Tools 573   Shortest Execution Time
2019-Gold < ITS-Tools 143 Times tool wins 713 264
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 4 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 30 2 41


On the chart below, denote cases where the two tools did computed all results without error, denote cases where the two tool did computed the same number of values (but not al values in the examination), denote cases where 2019-Gold computed more values than ITS-Tools, denote cases where 2019-Gold computed less values than ITS-Tools, denote the cases where at least one tool did not competed, denote the cases where at least one tool computed a bad value and denote the cases where at least one tool stated it could not compute a result or timed-out.

2019-Gold wins when points are below the diagonal, ITS-Tools wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

2019-Gold versus ITS-LoLa

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 2036 runs (1018 for 2019-Gold and 1018 for ITS-LoLa, so there are 1018 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing 2019-Gold to ITS-LoLa are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  2019-Gold ITS-LoLa Both tools   2019-Gold ITS-LoLa
All computed OK 6 33 313   Smallest Memory Footprint
2019-Gold = ITS-LoLa 225 Times tool wins 654 322
2019-Gold > ITS-LoLa 159   Shortest Execution Time
2019-Gold < ITS-LoLa 240 Times tool wins 943 33
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 3 5 1  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 30 1 41


On the chart below, denote cases where the two tools did computed all results without error, denote cases where the two tool did computed the same number of values (but not al values in the examination), denote cases where 2019-Gold computed more values than ITS-LoLa, denote cases where 2019-Gold computed less values than ITS-LoLa, denote the cases where at least one tool did not competed, denote the cases where at least one tool computed a bad value and denote the cases where at least one tool stated it could not compute a result or timed-out.

2019-Gold wins when points are below the diagonal, ITS-LoLa wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

2019-Gold versus enPAC

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 2036 runs (1018 for 2019-Gold and 1018 for enPAC, so there are 1018 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing 2019-Gold to enPAC are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  2019-Gold enPAC Both tools   2019-Gold enPAC
All computed OK 134 56 87   Smallest Memory Footprint
2019-Gold = enPAC 71 Times tool wins 686 313
2019-Gold > enPAC 569   Shortest Execution Time
2019-Gold < enPAC 82 Times tool wins 520 479
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 3 117 1  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 57 21 14


On the chart below, denote cases where the two tools did computed all results without error, denote cases where the two tool did computed the same number of values (but not al values in the examination), denote cases where 2019-Gold computed more values than enPAC, denote cases where 2019-Gold computed less values than enPAC, denote the cases where at least one tool did not competed, denote the cases where at least one tool computed a bad value and denote the cases where at least one tool stated it could not compute a result or timed-out.

2019-Gold wins when points are below the diagonal, enPAC wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart