fond
Model Checking Contest 2024
14th edition, Geneva, Switzerland, June 25, 2024
Tapaal compared to other tools («Surprise» models, ReachabilityDeadlock)
Last Updated
July 7, 2024

Introduction

This page presents how Tapaal do cope efficiently with the ReachabilityDeadlock 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+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 208 runs (104 for Tapaal and 104 for GreatSPN+red, so there are 104 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to GreatSPN+red are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal GreatSPN+red Both tools   Tapaal GreatSPN+red
All computed OK 2 13 83   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = GreatSPN+red 0 Times tool wins 75 23
Tapaal > GreatSPN+red 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < GreatSPN+red 0 Times tool wins 62 36
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 13 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 Tapaal computed more values than GreatSPN+red, denote cases where Tapaal computed less values than GreatSPN+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, GreatSPN+red wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus LTSMin+red

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 208 runs (104 for Tapaal and 104 for LTSMin+red, so there are 104 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes 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 5 13 80   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = LTSMin+red 0 Times tool wins 75 23
Tapaal > LTSMin+red 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < LTSMin+red 0 Times tool wins 66 32
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 13 5 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 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 ITS-Tools

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 208 runs (104 for Tapaal and 104 for ITS-Tools, so there are 104 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes 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 4 13 81   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = ITS-Tools 0 Times tool wins 74 24
Tapaal > ITS-Tools 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < ITS-Tools 0 Times tool wins 64 34
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 13 4 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 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

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 208 runs (104 for Tapaal and 104 for LoLA, so there are 104 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes 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 20 0 65   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = LoLA 0 Times tool wins 44 41
Tapaal > LoLA 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < LoLA 0 Times tool wins 21 64
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 20 19


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

Tapaal versus 2023-gold

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 208 runs (104 for Tapaal and 104 for 2023-gold, so there are 104 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to 2023-gold are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Statistics on the executions
  Tapaal 2023-gold Both tools   Tapaal 2023-gold
All computed OK 7 12 78   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = 2023-gold 0 Times tool wins 77 20
Tapaal > 2023-gold 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < 2023-gold 0 Times tool wins 68 29
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 12 7 7


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 2023-gold, denote cases where Tapaal 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.

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

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus BVT-2024

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 208 runs (104 for Tapaal and 104 for BVT-2024, so there are 104 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes and 16 GByte of memory. Then performance charts comparing Tapaal to BVT-2024 are shown (you may click on one graph to enlarge it).

Important: here, Tapaal is compared to BVT-2024. 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-2024 Both tools   Tapaal BVT-2024
All computed OK 0 13 85   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = BVT-2024 0 Times tool wins 0 98
Tapaal > BVT-2024 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < BVT-2024 0 Times tool wins 0 98
Do not compete 0 6 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 19 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-2024, denote cases where Tapaal 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.

Tapaal wins when points are below the diagonal, BVT-2024 wins when points are above the diagonal.

memory chart time chart

Tapaal versus GreatSPN

Some statistics are displayed below, based on 208 runs (104 for Tapaal and 104 for GreatSPN, so there are 104 plots on each of the two charts). Each execution was allowed 30 minutes 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 6 0 79   Smallest Memory Footprint
Tapaal = GreatSPN 0 Times tool wins 82 3
Tapaal > GreatSPN 0   Shortest Execution Time
Tapaal < GreatSPN 0 Times tool wins 67 18
Do not compete 0 0 0
Error detected 0 0 0  
Cannot Compute + Time-out 0 6 19


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