fond
Model Checking Contest 2023
13th edition, Paris, France, April 26, 2023 (at TOOLympics II)
Smart+red compared to other tools («All» models, StableMarking)
Last Updated
May 14, 2023

Introduction

This page presents how Smart+red do cope efficiently with the StableMarking examination face to the other participating tools. In this page, we consider «All» 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 Smart+red' 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).

Smart+red versus GreatSPN

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for GreatSPN, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to GreatSPN are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red GreatSPN Both tools   Smart+red GreatSPN
All computed OK 653 12 922   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = GreatSPN 0 Times tool wins 1010 577
Smart+red > GreatSPN 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < GreatSPN 0 Times tool wins 993 594
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 12 653 91


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 Smart+red computed more values than GreatSPN, denote cases where Smart+red 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.

Smart+red wins when points are below the diagonal, GreatSPN wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus ITS-Tools

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for ITS-Tools, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to ITS-Tools are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red ITS-Tools Both tools   Smart+red ITS-Tools
All computed OK 16 24 1559   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = ITS-Tools 0 Times tool wins 1181 418
Smart+red > ITS-Tools 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < ITS-Tools 0 Times tool wins 1042 557
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 24 16 79


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 Smart+red computed more values than ITS-Tools, denote cases where Smart+red 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.

Smart+red wins when points are below the diagonal, ITS-Tools wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus Tapaal

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for Tapaal, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to Tapaal are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red Tapaal Both tools   Smart+red Tapaal
All computed OK 229 27 1346   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = Tapaal 0 Times tool wins 437 1165
Smart+red > Tapaal 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < Tapaal 0 Times tool wins 645 957
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 13 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 27 216 76


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

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

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus LoLa+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for LoLa+red, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to LoLa+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red LoLa+red Both tools   Smart+red LoLa+red
All computed OK 8 14 1567   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = LoLa+red 0 Times tool wins 736 853
Smart+red > LoLa+red 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < LoLa+red 0 Times tool wins 965 624
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 14 8 89


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

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

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus LTSMin+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for LTSMin+red, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to LTSMin+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red LTSMin+red Both tools   Smart+red LTSMin+red
All computed OK 4 6 1569   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = LTSMin+red 2 Times tool wins 780 801
Smart+red > LTSMin+red 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < LTSMin+red 0 Times tool wins 840 741
Do not compete 0 29 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 33 2 70


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

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

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus Marcie+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for Marcie+red, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to Marcie+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red Marcie+red Both tools   Smart+red Marcie+red
All computed OK 6 7 1567   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = Marcie+red 2 Times tool wins 735 847
Smart+red > Marcie+red 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < Marcie+red 0 Times tool wins 903 679
Do not compete 0 26 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 27 0 76


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 Smart+red computed more values than Marcie+red, denote cases where Smart+red computed less values than Marcie+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.

Smart+red wins when points are below the diagonal, Marcie+red wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus 2022-gold

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for 2022-gold, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to 2022-gold are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red 2022-gold Both tools   Smart+red 2022-gold
All computed OK 31 14 1544   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = 2022-gold 0 Times tool wins 206 1383
Smart+red > 2022-gold 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < 2022-gold 0 Times tool wins 280 1309
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 14 31 89


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 Smart+red computed more values than 2022-gold, denote cases where Smart+red 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.

Smart+red wins when points are below the diagonal, 2022-gold wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus BVT-2023

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for BVT-2023, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to BVT-2023 are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

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

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red BVT-2023 Both tools   Smart+red BVT-2023
All computed OK 3 50 1572   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = BVT-2023 0 Times tool wins 3 1622
Smart+red > BVT-2023 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < BVT-2023 0 Times tool wins 3 1622
Do not compete 0 56 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 103 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 Smart+red computed more values than BVT-2023, denote cases where Smart+red 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.

Smart+red wins when points are below the diagonal, BVT-2023 wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus LoLA

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for LoLA, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to LoLA are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red LoLA Both tools   Smart+red LoLA
All computed OK 260 26 1315   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = LoLA 0 Times tool wins 506 1095
Smart+red > LoLA 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < LoLA 0 Times tool wins 403 1198
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 24 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 26 236 77


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 Smart+red computed more values than LoLA, denote cases where Smart+red 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.

Smart+red wins when points are below the diagonal, LoLA wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus Marcie

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for Marcie, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to Marcie are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red Marcie Both tools   Smart+red Marcie
All computed OK 1575 0 0   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = Marcie 0 Times tool wins 1575 0
Smart+red > Marcie 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < Marcie 0 Times tool wins 1575 0
Do not compete 0 1642 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 98 31 5


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 Smart+red computed more values than Marcie, denote cases where Smart+red computed less values than Marcie, 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.

Smart+red wins when points are below the diagonal, Marcie wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Smart+red versus Smart

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for Smart+red and 1678 for Smart, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Smart+red to Smart are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Smart+red Smart Both tools   Smart+red Smart
All computed OK 1122 0 453   Smallest Memory Footprint
Smart+red = Smart 0 Times tool wins 1346 229
Smart+red > Smart 0   Shortest Execution Time
Smart+red < Smart 0 Times tool wins 1364 211
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 3 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 1119 103


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

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

memory chart time chart