fond
Model Checking Contest 2023
13th edition, Paris, France, April 26, 2023 (at TOOLympics II)
Tapaal compared to other tools («Surprise» models, LTLFireability)
Last Updated
May 14, 2023

Introduction

This page presents how Tapaal do cope efficiently with the LTLFireability examination face to the other participating tools. In this page, we consider «Surprise» 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 Tapaal' 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).

Tapaal versus GreatSPN

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Tapaal and 61 for GreatSPN, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to GreatSPN are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal GreatSPN Both tools   Tapaal GreatSPN
All computed OK 25 0 16   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = GreatSPN 0 Times tool wins 49 12
Tapaal > GreatSPN 18   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < GreatSPN 2 Times tool wins 43 18
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 25 0


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 Tapaal computed more values than GreatSPN, denote cases where Tapaal 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.

Tapaal wins when points are below the diagonal, GreatSPN wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus ITS-Tools

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Tapaal and 61 for ITS-Tools, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to ITS-Tools are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal ITS-Tools Both tools   Tapaal ITS-Tools
All computed OK 0 0 30   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = ITS-Tools 6 Times tool wins 32 29
Tapaal > ITS-Tools 4   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < ITS-Tools 21 Times tool wins 45 16
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 0 0


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 Tapaal computed more values than ITS-Tools, denote cases where Tapaal 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.

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

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus LoLa+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Tapaal and 61 for LoLa+red, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to LoLa+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal LoLa+red Both tools   Tapaal LoLa+red
All computed OK 0 0 26   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = LoLa+red 10 Times tool wins 28 33
Tapaal > LoLa+red 10   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < LoLa+red 15 Times tool wins 31 30
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 0 0


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 Tapaal computed more values than LoLa+red, denote cases where Tapaal computed less values than LoLa+red, 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.

Tapaal wins when points are below the diagonal, LoLa+red wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus LTSMin+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Tapaal and 61 for LTSMin+red, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to LTSMin+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal LTSMin+red Both tools   Tapaal LTSMin+red
All computed OK 0 0 14   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = LTSMin+red 3 Times tool wins 27 34
Tapaal > LTSMin+red 33   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < LTSMin+red 11 Times tool wins 30 31
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 0 0


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 Tapaal computed more values than LTSMin+red, denote cases where Tapaal computed less values than LTSMin+red, 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.

Tapaal wins when points are below the diagonal, LTSMin+red wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus 2022-gold

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Tapaal and 61 for 2022-gold, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to 2022-gold are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal 2022-gold Both tools   Tapaal 2022-gold
All computed OK 0 0 32   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = 2022-gold 29 Times tool wins 30 31
Tapaal > 2022-gold 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < 2022-gold 0 Times tool wins 37 24
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 0 0


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 Tapaal computed more values than 2022-gold, denote cases where Tapaal computed less values than 2022-gold, 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.

Tapaal wins when points are below the diagonal, 2022-gold wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus BVT-2023

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Tapaal and 61 for BVT-2023, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to BVT-2023 are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Important: here, Tapaal is compared to BVT-2023. It is a good way to check how Tapaal compete in terms of resource consomption with the best tools (even virtual). When Tapaal is best, the corresponding plots are on the diagonal of the scatter plots chart.

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal BVT-2023 Both tools   Tapaal BVT-2023
All computed OK 0 0 32   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = BVT-2023 5 Times tool wins 0 61
Tapaal > BVT-2023 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < BVT-2023 24 Times tool wins 0 61
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 0 0


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 Tapaal computed more values than BVT-2023, denote cases where Tapaal computed less values than BVT-2023, 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.

Tapaal wins when points are below the diagonal, BVT-2023 wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus LoLA

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Tapaal and 61 for LoLA, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to LoLA are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal LoLA Both tools   Tapaal LoLA
All computed OK 0 0 18   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = LoLA 11 Times tool wins 21 40
Tapaal > LoLA 30   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < LoLA 2 Times tool wins 36 25
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 0 0


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 Tapaal computed more values than LoLA, denote cases where Tapaal computed less values than 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.

Tapaal wins when points are below the diagonal, LoLA wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart