Emmanuel Paviot-Adet

dblp:21/3939 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
8ranked-venue papers
2as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 5 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021Computer networks · 2 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Structural Reductions and Stutter Sensitive Properties
abstract
Verification of properties expressed as $\omega$-regular languages such as LTL can benefit hugely from stutter insensitivity, using a diverse set of reduction strategies. However properties that are not stutter invariant, for instance due to the use of the neXt operator of LTL or to some form of counting in the logic, are not covered by these techniques in general. We propose in this paper to study a weaker property than stutter insensitivity. In a stutter insensitive language both adding and removing stutter to a word does not change its acceptance, any stuttering can be abstracted away; by decomposing this equivalence relation into two implications we obtain weaker conditions. We define a shortening insensitive language where any word that stutters less than a word in the language must also belong to the language. A lengthening insensitive language has the dual property. A semi-decision procedure is then introduced to reliably prove shortening insensitive properties or deny lengthening insensitive properties while working with a \emph{reduction} of a system. A reduction has the property that it can only shorten runs. Lipton's transaction reductions or Petri net agglomerations are examples of eligible structural reduction strategies. We also present an approach that can reason using a partition of a property language into its stutter insensitive, shortening insensitive, lengthening insensitive and length sensitive parts to still use structural reductions even when working with arbitrary properties. An implementation and experimental evidence is provided showing most non-random properties sensitive to stutter are actually shortening or lengthening insensitive.
Emmanuel Paviot-Adet, Denis Poitrenaud, Etienne Renault, Yann Thierry-Mieg
Log. Methods Comput. Sci.1
2024 A model-checker exploiting structural reductions even with stutter sensitive LTL
Yann Thierry-Mieg, Etienne Renault, Emmanuel Paviot-Adet, Denis Poitrenaud
Sci. Comput. Program.3
2022 LTL Under Reductions with Weaker Conditions Than Stutter Invariance
abstract
Verification of properties expressed as-regular languages such as LTL can benefit hugely from stutter-insensitivity, using a diverse set of reduction strategies. However properties that are not stutter-insensitive, for instance due to the use of the neXt operator of LTL or to some form of counting in the logic, are not covered by these techniques in general. We propose in this paper to study a weaker property than stutter-insensitivity. In a stutter insensitive language both adding and removing stutter to a word does not change its acceptance, any stuttering can be abstracted away; by decomposing this equivalence relation into two implications we obtain weaker conditions. We define a shortening insensitive language where any word that stutters less than a word in the language must also belong to the language. A lengthening insensitive language has the dual property. A semi-decision procedure is then introduced to reliably prove shortening insensitive properties or deny lengthening insensitive properties while working with a reduction of a system. A reduction has the property that it can only shorten runs. Lipton's transaction reductions or Petri net agglomerations are examples of eligible structural reduction strategies. An implementation and experimental evidence is provided showing most nonrandom properties sensitive to stutter are actually shortening or lengthening insensitive. Performance of experiments on a large (random) benchmark from the model-checking competition indicate that despite being a semi-decision procedure, the approach can still improve state of the art verification tools.
Emmanuel Paviot-Adet, Denis Poitrenaud, Etienne Renault, Yann Thierry-Mieg
FORTE1
2021 Study of the efficiency of model checking techniques using results of the MCC from 2015 To 2019
Fabrice Kordon, Lom-Messan Hillah, Francis Hulin-Hubard, Loïg Jezequel, Emmanuel Paviot-Adet
Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf.5
2019 Presentation of the 9th Edition of the Model Checking Contest
abstract
The Model Checking Contest (MCC) is an annual competition of software tools for model checking. Tools must process an increasing benchmark gathered from the whole community and may participate in various examinations: state space generation, computation of global properties, computation of some upper bounds in the model, evaluation of reachability formulas, evaluation of CTL formulas, and evaluation of LTL formulas. For each examination and each model instance, participating tools are provided with up to 3600 s and 16 gigabyte of memory. Then, tool answers are analyzed and confronted to the results produced by other competing tools to detect diverging answers (which are quite rare at this stage of the competition, and lead to penalties). For each examination, golden, silver, and bronze medals are attributed to the three best tools. CPU usage and memory consumption are reported, which is also valuable information for tool developers.
Elvio Gilberto Amparore, Bernard Berthomieu, Gianfranco Ciardo, Silvano Dal-Zilio, Francesco Gallà, Lom-Messan Hillah, Francis Hulin-Hubard, Peter Gjøl Jensen, Loïg Jezequel, Fabrice Kordon, Didier Le Botlan, Torsten Liebke, Jeroen Meijer, Andrew S. Miner, Emmanuel Paviot-Adet, Jirí Srba, Yann Thierry-Mieg, Tom van Dijk, Karsten Wolf
TACAS (3)15
2014 A Model to Specify Inter-company Cooperation
abstract
International audience
Meriem Kermani, Mahmoud Boufaïda, Emmanuel Paviot-Adet
WEBIST (1)3
2009 P-Semiflow Computation with Decision Diagrams
Gianfranco Ciardo, Galen Mecham, Emmanuel Paviot-Adet
Petri Nets3
2006 Optimized Colored Nets Unfolding
Fabrice Kordon, Alban Linard, Emmanuel Paviot-Adet
FORTE3