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

Introduction

This page presents how Marcie+red do cope efficiently with the QuasiLiveness 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 Marcie+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).

Marcie+red versus GreatSPN

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for GreatSPN, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to GreatSPN are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red GreatSPN Both tools   Marcie+red GreatSPN
All computed OK 16 0 36   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = GreatSPN 0 Times tool wins 32 20
Marcie+red > GreatSPN 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < GreatSPN 0 Times tool wins 33 19
Do not compete 3 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 19 6


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

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus ITS-Tools

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for ITS-Tools, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to ITS-Tools are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red ITS-Tools Both tools   Marcie+red ITS-Tools
All computed OK 0 1 52   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = ITS-Tools 0 Times tool wins 34 19
Marcie+red > ITS-Tools 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < ITS-Tools 0 Times tool wins 30 23
Do not compete 3 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 2 6


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

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus Tapaal

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for Tapaal, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to Tapaal are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red Tapaal Both tools   Marcie+red Tapaal
All computed OK 13 0 39   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = Tapaal 0 Times tool wins 16 36
Marcie+red > Tapaal 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < Tapaal 0 Times tool wins 23 29
Do not compete 3 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 16 6


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

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus LoLa+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for LoLa+red, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to LoLa+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red LoLa+red Both tools   Marcie+red LoLa+red
All computed OK 0 1 52   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = LoLa+red 0 Times tool wins 31 22
Marcie+red > LoLa+red 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < LoLa+red 0 Times tool wins 28 25
Do not compete 3 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 2 6


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

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus LTSMin+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for LTSMin+red, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to LTSMin+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red LTSMin+red Both tools   Marcie+red LTSMin+red
All computed OK 0 0 52   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = LTSMin+red 0 Times tool wins 32 20
Marcie+red > LTSMin+red 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < LTSMin+red 0 Times tool wins 33 19
Do not compete 0 1 3
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 1 0 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 Marcie+red computed more values than LTSMin+red, denote cases where Marcie+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.

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus Smart+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for Smart+red, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to Smart+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red Smart+red Both tools   Marcie+red Smart+red
All computed OK 0 1 52   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = Smart+red 0 Times tool wins 36 17
Marcie+red > Smart+red 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < Smart+red 0 Times tool wins 29 24
Do not compete 3 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 2 6


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

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus 2022-gold

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for 2022-gold, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to 2022-gold are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red 2022-gold Both tools   Marcie+red 2022-gold
All computed OK 21 0 31   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = 2022-gold 0 Times tool wins 21 31
Marcie+red > 2022-gold 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < 2022-gold 0 Times tool wins 21 31
Do not compete 3 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 24 6


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

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus BVT-2023

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for BVT-2023, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to BVT-2023 are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

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

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red BVT-2023 Both tools   Marcie+red BVT-2023
All computed OK 0 1 52   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = BVT-2023 0 Times tool wins 0 53
Marcie+red > BVT-2023 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < BVT-2023 0 Times tool wins 0 53
Do not compete 1 6 2
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 6 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 Marcie+red computed more values than BVT-2023, denote cases where Marcie+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.

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus LoLA

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for LoLA, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to LoLA are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red LoLA Both tools   Marcie+red LoLA
All computed OK 12 1 40   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = LoLA 0 Times tool wins 17 36
Marcie+red > LoLA 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < LoLA 0 Times tool wins 13 40
Do not compete 3 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 14 6


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

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

memory chart time chart

Marcie+red versus Smart

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 122 runs (61 for Marcie+red and 61 for Smart, so there are 61 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Marcie+red to Smart are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Marcie+red Smart Both tools   Marcie+red Smart
All computed OK 48 0 4   Smallest Memory Footprint
Marcie+red = Smart 0 Times tool wins 50 2
Marcie+red > Smart 0   Shortest Execution Time
Marcie+red < Smart 0 Times tool wins 50 2
Do not compete 3 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 51 6


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

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

memory chart time chart