<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-07-20T05:25:18Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="708" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:708</identifier>
        <datestamp>2024-03-06T11:06:50Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>A Petri Net Approach to Verify and Debug Simulation Models</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Kemper, Peter</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Tepper, Carsten</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Discrete event simulation</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>verification</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>debugging</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>process interaction</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Petri net analysis</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>Verification and Simulation share many issues, one is that simulation&#13;
models require validation and verification. In the context of simulation,&#13;
verification is understood as the task to ensure that an executable simulation model&#13;
matches its conceptual counterpart while validation is the task to ensure that a simulation&#13;
model represents the system under study well enough with respect to the goals of the simulation study. &#13;
Both, validation and verification, are treated in the&#13;
literature at a rather high level and seem to be more an art than&#13;
engineering. This paper considers discrete event simulation of&#13;
stochastic models that are formulated in a process-oriented language.  &#13;
The ProC/B paradigm is used as a particular example of a class of&#13;
simulation languages which follow the common process interaction&#13;
approach and show common concepts used in performance modeling,&#13;
namely a) layered systems of virtual machines that contain resources and&#13;
provide services and b) concurrent processes that interact by&#13;
message passing and shared memory. &#13;
We describe how Petri net analysis&#13;
techniques help to verify and debug a large and detailed simulation model of&#13;
airport logistics. We automatically derive a Petri net that models the control&#13;
flow of a Proc/B model and we make use of invariant analysis and modelchecking to shed&#13;
light on the allocation of resources, constraints among entities and&#13;
causes for deadlocks.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Peter Kemper and Carsten Tepper</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2006</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 6161, Simulation and Verification of Dynamic Systems (2006)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>InProceedings</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/DagSemProc.06161.4</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-7084</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DagSemProc.06161.4</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
