fond
Model Checking Contest 2024
14th edition, Geneva, Switzerland, June 25, 2024
GreatSPN+red compared to other tools («Known» models, CTLCardinality)
Last Updated
July 7, 2024

Introduction

This page presents how GreatSPN+red do cope efficiently with the CTLCardinality 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 GreatSPN+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).

GreatSPN+red versus LTSMin+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for GreatSPN+red and 1678 for LTSMin+red, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing GreatSPN+red to LTSMin+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  GreatSPN+red LTSMin+red Both tools   GreatSPN+red LTSMin+red
All computed OK 33 2 2   Smallest Memory Footprint
GreatSPN+red = LTSMin+red 671 Times tool wins 339 1275
GreatSPN+red > LTSMin+red 901   Shortest Execution Time
GreatSPN+red < LTSMin+red 5 Times tool wins 144 1470
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 1 0 2  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 1 33 62


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

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

memory chart time chart

GreatSPN+red versus ITS-Tools

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for GreatSPN+red and 1678 for ITS-Tools, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing GreatSPN+red to ITS-Tools are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  GreatSPN+red ITS-Tools Both tools   GreatSPN+red ITS-Tools
All computed OK 11 7 507   Smallest Memory Footprint
GreatSPN+red = ITS-Tools 531 Times tool wins 1077 542
GreatSPN+red > ITS-Tools 194   Shortest Execution Time
GreatSPN+red < ITS-Tools 369 Times tool wins 902 717
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 1 3  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 7 10 56


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

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

memory chart time chart

GreatSPN+red versus LoLA

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for GreatSPN+red and 1678 for LoLA, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing GreatSPN+red to LoLA are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  GreatSPN+red LoLA Both tools   GreatSPN+red LoLA
All computed OK 236 23 259   Smallest Memory Footprint
GreatSPN+red = LoLA 140 Times tool wins 1062 573
GreatSPN+red > LoLA 611   Shortest Execution Time
GreatSPN+red < LoLA 366 Times tool wins 720 915
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 3 6 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 20 230 43


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

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

memory chart time chart

GreatSPN+red versus Tapaal

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for GreatSPN+red and 1678 for Tapaal, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing GreatSPN+red to Tapaal are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  GreatSPN+red Tapaal Both tools   GreatSPN+red Tapaal
All computed OK 20 61 309   Smallest Memory Footprint
GreatSPN+red = Tapaal 30 Times tool wins 1168 505
GreatSPN+red > Tapaal 271   Shortest Execution Time
GreatSPN+red < Tapaal 982 Times tool wins 786 887
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 1 0 2  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 60 20 3


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

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

memory chart time chart

GreatSPN+red versus 2023-gold

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for GreatSPN+red and 1678 for 2023-gold, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing GreatSPN+red to 2023-gold are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  GreatSPN+red 2023-gold Both tools   GreatSPN+red 2023-gold
All computed OK 20 61 309   Smallest Memory Footprint
GreatSPN+red = 2023-gold 34 Times tool wins 1189 484
GreatSPN+red > 2023-gold 271   Shortest Execution Time
GreatSPN+red < 2023-gold 978 Times tool wins 794 879
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 1 0 2  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 60 20 3


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 GreatSPN+red computed more values than 2023-gold, denote cases where GreatSPN+red computed less values than 2023-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.

GreatSPN+red wins when points are below the diagonal, 2023-gold wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

GreatSPN+red versus BVT-2024

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for GreatSPN+red and 1678 for BVT-2024, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing GreatSPN+red to BVT-2024 are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Important: here, GreatSPN+red is compared to BVT-2024. It is a good way to check how GreatSPN+red compete in terms of resource consomption with the best tools (even virtual). When GreatSPN+red is best, the corresponding plots are on the diagonal of the scatter plots chart.

Statistics on the executions
  GreatSPN+red BVT-2024 Both tools   GreatSPN+red BVT-2024
All computed OK 0 63 527   Smallest Memory Footprint
GreatSPN+red = BVT-2024 43 Times tool wins 0 1675
GreatSPN+red > BVT-2024 0   Shortest Execution Time
GreatSPN+red < BVT-2024 1042 Times tool wins 0 1675
Do not compete 0 3 0
Error detected 3 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 63 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 GreatSPN+red computed more values than BVT-2024, denote cases where GreatSPN+red computed less values than BVT-2024, 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.

GreatSPN+red wins when points are below the diagonal, BVT-2024 wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

GreatSPN+red versus GreatSPN

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 3356 runs (1678 for GreatSPN+red and 1678 for GreatSPN, so there are 1678 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 1 hour and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing GreatSPN+red to GreatSPN are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  GreatSPN+red GreatSPN Both tools   GreatSPN+red GreatSPN
All computed OK 692 4 453   Smallest Memory Footprint
GreatSPN+red = GreatSPN 100 Times tool wins 1053 563
GreatSPN+red > GreatSPN 294   Shortest Execution Time
GreatSPN+red < GreatSPN 73 Times tool wins 962 654
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 1 0 2  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 3 692 60


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

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

memory chart time chart