Petri nets: an introduction
Reasoning about systems with many processes
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
The Minimal Coverability Graph for Petri Nets
Papers from the 12th International Conference on Applications and Theory of Petri Nets: Advances in Petri Nets 1993
CAV '97 Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification
Acta Informatica
From Many Places to Few: Automatic Abstraction Refinement for Petri Nets
Fundamenta Informaticae - PETRI NETS 2007
Forward Analysis for WSTS, Part II: Complete WSTS
ICALP '09 Proceedings of the 36th Internatilonal Collogquium on Automata, Languages and Programming: Part II
Solving coverability problem for monotonic counter systems by supercompilation
PSI'11 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Perspectives of System Informatics
From Many Places to Few: Automatic Abstraction Refinement for Petri Nets
Fundamenta Informaticae - PETRI NETS 2007
The theory of WSTS: the case of complete WSTS
PETRI NETS'12 Proceedings of the 33rd international conference on Application and Theory of Petri Nets
Efficient coverability analysis by proof minimization
CONCUR'12 Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Concurrency Theory
Hi-index | 0.00 |
The minimal coverability set (MCS) of a Petri net is a finite representation of the downward-closure of its reachable markings. The minimal coverability set allows to decide several important problems like coverability, semi-liveness, place boundedness, etc. The classical algorithm to compute the MCS constructs the Karp&Miller tree [8]. Unfortunately the K&M tree is often huge, even for small nets. An improvement of this K&M algorithm is the Minimal Coverability Tree (MCT) algorithm [1], which has been introduced 15 years ago, and implemented since then in several tools such as Pep [7]. Unfortunately, we show in this paper that the MCT is flawed: it might compute an under-approximation of the reachable markings. We propose a new solution for the efficient computation of the MCS of Petri nets. Our experimental results show that this new algorithm behaves much better in practice than the K&M algorithm.