Skip to content
GitLab
Menu
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Help
Help
Support
Community forum
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Submit feedback
Contribute to GitLab
Sign in
Toggle navigation
Menu
Open sidebar
Spot
Spot
Commits
84b6240a
Commit
84b6240a
authored
Aug 21, 2012
by
Alexandre Duret-Lutz
Browse files
* src/tgbaalgos/simulation.hh: Improve documentation.
parent
25b8d50c
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
src/tgbaalgos/simulation.hh
View file @
84b6240a
...
...
@@ -30,11 +30,13 @@ namespace spot
/// \addtogroup tgba_reduction
/// @{
/// \brief Attempt to reduce the automaton by direct simulation When
/// the suffixes (letter and acceptance conditions) seen by one
/// state is included in the suffixes seen by another one, the first
/// one is merged with the second. The algorithm is based on the
/// following paper, but generalized to handle TGBA directly.
/// \brief Attempt to reduce the automaton by direct simulation.
///
/// When the suffixes (letter and acceptance conditions) reachable
/// from one state are included in the suffixes seen by another one,
/// the former state can be merged into the latter. The algorithm is
/// based on the following paper, but generalized to handle TGBA
/// directly.
///
/// \verbatim
/// @InProceedings{ etessami.00.concur,
...
...
@@ -52,45 +54,87 @@ namespace spot
/// }
/// \endverbatim
///
/// Our reconstruction of the quotient automaton based on this
/// suffix-inclusion relation will also improve determinism.
///
/// We recommend to call scc_filter() to first simplify the
/// automaton that should be reduced by simulation.
///
/// Reducing an automaton by simulation does not change the number
/// of acceptance conditions. In some rare cases (1 out of more
/// than 500 in our benchmark), the reduced automaton will use more
/// acceptance conditions than necessary, and running scc_filter()
/// again afterwards will remove these superfluous conditions.
///
/// \param automaton the automaton to simulate.
/// \return a new automaton which is at worst a copy of the received
/// one
tgba
*
simulation
(
const
tgba
*
automaton
);
/// \brief Attempt to reduce the automaton by direct cosimulation.
/// When the prefixes (letter and acceptance conditions) seen by one
/// state is included in the prefixes seen by another one, the first
/// one is merged with the second. The algorithm is based on the
/// \brief Attempt to reduce the automaton by reverse simulation.
///
/// When the prefixes (letter and acceptance conditions) leading to
/// one state are included in the prefixes leading to one, the former
/// state can be merged into the latter.
///
/// Reverse simulation is discussed in the following paper, bu
/// following paper, but generalized to handle TGBA directly.
/// \verbatim
/// @InProceedings{Somenzi:2000:EBA:647769.734097,
/// author = {Somenzi, Fabio and Bloem, Roderick},
/// title = {Efficient {B\"u}chi Automata from LTL Formulae},
/// booktitle = {Proceedings of the 12th International
/// Conference on Computer Aided Verification},
/// series = {CAV '00},
/// year = {2000},
/// isbn = {3-540-67770-4},
/// pages = {248--263},
/// numpages = {16},
/// url = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=647769.734097},
/// acmid = {734097},
/// publisher = {Springer-Verlag},
/// address = {London, UK, UK},
/// @InProceedings{ somenzi.00.cav,
/// author = {Fabio Somenzi and Roderick Bloem},
/// title = {Efficient {B\"u}chi Automata for {LTL} Formul{\ae}},
/// booktitle = {Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on
/// Computer Aided Verification (CAV'00)},
/// pages = {247--263},
/// year = {2000},
/// volume = {1855},
/// series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
/// address = {Chicago, Illinois, USA},
/// publisher = {Springer-Verlag}
/// }
/// \endverbatim
///
/// Our reconstruction of the quotient automaton based on this
/// prefix-inclusion relation will also improve codeterminism.
///
/// We recommend to call scc_filter() to first simplify the
/// automaton that should be reduced by cosimulation.
///
/// Reducing an automaton by reverse simulation (1) does not change
/// the number of acceptance conditions so the resulting automaton
/// may have superfluous acceptance conditions, and (2) can create
/// SCCs that are terminal and non-accepting. For these reasons,
/// you should call scc_filer() to prune useless SCCs and acceptance
/// conditions afterwards.
///
/// If you plan to run both simulation() and cosimulation() on the
/// same automaton, you should start with simulation() so that the
/// codeterminism improvements achieved by cosimulation() does not
/// hinder the determinism improvements attempted by simulation().
/// (This of course assumes that you prefer determinism over
/// codeterminism.)
///
/// \param automaton the automaton to simulate.
/// \return a new automaton which is at worst a copy of the received
/// one
tgba
*
cosimulation
(
const
tgba
*
automaton
);
/// \brief Run a loop: simulation / cosimulation / scc_filter until
/// a fix point is reached.
/// \brief Iterate simulation() and cosimulation().
///
/// Runs simulation(), cosimulation(), and scc_filter() in a loop,
/// until the automaton does not change size (states and
/// transitions).
///
/// We recommend to call scc_filter() to first simplify the
/// automaton that should be reduced by iterated simulations, since
/// this algorithm will only call scc_filter() at the end of the
/// loop.
///
/// \param automaton the automaton to simulate.
/// \return a new automaton which is at worst a copy of the received
/// one
tgba
*
iterated_simulations
(
const
tgba
*
automaton
);
/// @}
}
// End namespace spot.
...
...
Write
Preview
Supports
Markdown
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment