Abstract | ||
---|---|---|
Packet switched networks are widely used for interconnecting distributed computing platforms. RapidIO (Rapid Input/Output) is an industry standard for packet switched networks to interconnect multiple processor boards. Key performance metrics for these platforms include average-case and worst-case packet transfer latencies. We focus on verifying such quantitative properties for a RapidIO based multiprocessor platform that executes a motion control application. A performance model is available in the Parallel Object-Oriented Specification Language (POOSL) that allows for simulation based estimation results. It is however required to determine the exact worst-case latency as the application is time-critical. A model checking approach has been proposed in our previous work which transforms the POOSL model into an UPPAAL model. However, such an approach only works for a fairly small system. We extend the transformation approach with various heuristics to reduce the underlying state space, thereby providing an effective approximation approach that scales to industrial problems of a reasonable complexity. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
---|---|---|
2010 | 10.1007/978-3-642-16561-0_20 | ISoLA |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
quantitative verification,model checking approach,key performance metrics,effective approximation approach,rapidio network,worst-case packet transfer latency,uppaal model,exact worst-case latency,transformation approach,performance model,motion control application,poosl model,state space,motion control,distributed computing,model checking,input output | Specification language,Heuristic,Model checking,Computer science,Network packet,RapidIO,Multiprocessing,Heuristics,State space,Distributed computing | Conference |
Volume | ISSN | ISBN |
6416 | 0302-9743 | 3-642-16560-5 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
1 | 0.35 | 6 |
Authors | ||
6 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
---|---|---|---|
Jiansheng Xing | 1 | 14 | 1.32 |
Bart Theelen | 2 | 184 | 10.89 |
Rom Langerak | 3 | 308 | 39.16 |
Jaco Van De Pol | 4 | 1022 | 78.19 |
Jan Tretmans | 5 | 1624 | 97.10 |
J. P. M. Voeten | 6 | 80 | 6.82 |