References

  1. CSMA/CD protocol. http://www.prismmodelchecker.org/casestudies/csma.php.
  2. IPv4 Zeroconf protocol.http://www.prismmodelchecker.org/casestudies/zeroconf.php.
  3. PRISM benchmark suite - Models. http://www.prismmodelchecker.org/benchmarks/models.php#mdps.
  4. H. Aljazzar, F. Leitner-Fischer, S. Leue & D. Simeonov (2011): DiPro - A Tool for Probabilistic Counterexample Generation. In: Proceedings of the 18th International SPIN Workshop, LNCS 6823. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 183–187, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22306-8_13.
  5. H. Aljazzar & S. Leue (2009): Generation of counterexamples for model checking of Markov decision processes. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of Systems (QEST), pp. 197–206, doi:10.1109/QEST.2009.10.
  6. H. Aljazzar & S. Leue (2010): Directed explicit state-space search in the generation of counterexamples for stochastic model checking. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 36(1), pp. 37–60, doi:10.1109/TSE.2009.57.
  7. Husain Aljazzar & Stefan Leue (2011): K*: A heuristic search algorithm for finding the k shortest paths. Artificial Intelligence 175(18), pp. 2129 – 2154, doi:10.1016/j.artint.2011.07.003.
  8. A. Aziz, K. Sanwal, V. Singhal & R. Brayton (2000): Model-checking continuous-time Markov chains. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 1(1), pp. 162–170, doi:10.1145/343369.343402.
  9. C. Baier, B. Haverkort, H. Hermanns & J.-P Katoen (2003): Model checking algorithms for continuous-time Markov chains. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 29(7), pp. 524–541, doi:10.1109/TSE.2003.1205180.
  10. T. Ball, M. Naik & S.K. Rajamani (2003): From symptom to cause: Localizing errors in counterexample traces. In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on the Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 97–105, doi:10.1145/640128.604140.
  11. A. Beer, S. Heidinger, U. Kuhne, F. Leitner-Fischer & S. Leue (2015): Symbolic Causality Checking Using Bounded Model Checking. In: Proceedings of SPIN 2015, LNCS 9232. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 203–221, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-23404-5_14.
  12. H. Chockler & J. Y. Halpern (2004): Responsibility and blame: a structural model approach. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 22(1), pp. 93–115, doi:10.1613/jair.1391.
  13. H. Debbi (2014): Diagnosis of Probabilistic Models using Causality and Regression. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Verification and Evaluation of Computer and Communication Systems (VECoS 2014), pp. 33–44.
  14. H. Debbi & M. Bourahla (2013): Causal Analysis of Probabilistic Counterexamples. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM-IEEE International Conference on Formal Methods and Models for Codesign (Memocode), pp. 77–86.
  15. T. Eiter & T. Lukasiewicz (2002): Complexity results for structure-based causality. Artificial Intelligence 142(1), pp. 53, doi:10.1016/S0004-3702(02)00271-0.
  16. T. Eiter & T. Lukasiewicz (2006): Causes and explanations in the structural-model approach: Tractable cases. Artificial Intelligence 170(6–7), pp. 542–580, doi:10.1016/j.artint.2005.12.003.
  17. F. Fischer & S. Leue (2013): Causality Checking for Complex System Models. In: Proceedings of Verification, Model Checking, and Abstract Interpretation (VMCAI), LNCS 7737. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 248–276, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35873-9_16.
  18. A. Groce (2004): Error explanation with distance metrics. In: Proceedings of Conference on Tools and Algorithms for Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS), pp. 108–122, doi:10.1007/s10009-005-0202-0.
  19. J. Halpern & J. Pearl (2001): Causes and explanations: A structural-model approach part I: Causes. In: Proceedings of the 17th UAI, pp. 194–202, doi:10.1093/bjps/axi147.
  20. T. Han & J.P. Katoen (2009): Counterexamples Generation in probabilistic model checking. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 35(2), pp. 72–86, doi:10.1109/TSE.2009.5.
  21. H. Hansson & B. Jonsson (1994): Logic for reasoning about time and reliability. Formal aspects of Computing 6(5), pp. 512–535, doi:10.1007/BF01211866.
  22. A. Hinton, M. Kwiatkowska, G. Norman & D. Parker (2006): PRISM: A tool for automatic verification of probabilistic systems. In: Proceedings of TACAS, LNCS 3920. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 441–444, doi:10.1007/11691372_29.
  23. I.Beer, S. Ben-David, H. Chockler, A. Orni & R. Treer (2012): Explaining counterexamples using causality. Formal Methods Systems Design 40(1), pp. 20–40, doi:10.1007/s10703-011-0132-2.
  24. N. Jansen, E. Abraham, M. Volk, R. Wilmer, J.P Katoen & B. Becker (2012): Proceedings of The COMICS Tool - Computing Minimal Counterexamples for DTMCs. In: Proceedings of ATVA, LNCS 7561. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 249–253, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33386-6_27.
  25. J.-P. Katoen, M. Khattri & I. S. Zapreev (2005): A Markov Reward Model Checker. In: Proceedings of QEST, pp. 243–244, doi:10.1109/QEST.2005.2.
  26. F. Leitner-Fischer & S. Leue (2013): On the Synergy of Probabilistic Causality Computation and Causality Checking. In: Proceedings of SPIN 2013, LNCS 7976. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 246–263, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39176-7_16.
  27. F. Leitner-Fischer & S. Leue (2013): Probabilistic fault tree synthesis using causality computation. International Journal of Critical Computer-Based Systems 4(2), pp. 119–143, doi:10.1504/IJCCBS.2013.056492.
  28. R. Wimmer, N. Jansen, E. Abraham, B. Becker & J.P. Katoen (2012): Minimal Critical Subsystems for Discrete-Time Markov Models. In: Proceedings of TACAS, LNCS 7214. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 299–314, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28756-5_21.
  29. R. Wimmer, N. Jansen & A. Vorpahl (2013): High-Level Counterexamples for Probabilistic Automata. In: Proceedings of Quantitative Evaluation of Systems (QEST), LNCS 8054. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 39–54, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40196-1_4.

Comments and questions to: eptcs@eptcs.org
For website issues: webmaster@eptcs.org