BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Paper detail

Model Checking Branching Properties on Petri Nets with Transits (Full Version)

To model check concurrent systems, it is convenient to distinguish between the data flow and the control. Correctness is specified on the level of data flow whereas the system is configured on the level of control. Petri nets with transits and Flow-LTL are a corresponding formalism. In Flow-LTL, both the correctness of the data flow and assumptions on fairness and maximality for the control are expressed in linear time. So far, branching behavior cannot be specified for Petri nets with transits. In this paper, we introduce Flow-CTL* to express the intended branching behavior of the data flow while maintaining LTL for fairness and maximality assumptions on the control. We encode physical access control with policy updates as Petri nets with transits and give standard requirements in Flow-CTL*. For model checking, we reduce the model checking problem of Petri nets with transits against Flow-CTL* via automata constructions to the model checking problem of Petri nets against LTL. Thereby, physical access control with policy updates under fairness assumptions for an unbounded number of people can be verified.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
Bernd FinkbeinerManuel GiesekingJesko Hecking-HarbuschErnst-Rüdiger Olderog
Logic in Computer Science
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Like0Dislike0Score 0

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Save to reading list0
Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Authors

Bernd FinkbeinerManuel GiesekingJesko Hecking-HarbuschErnst-Rüdiger Olderog

Institutions

No institution affiliation has been imported for this paper yet.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form
Log in to review

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form
Log in to comment

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.