1. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999). 314 p

   Google Scholar 

2. Evangelista, S., Pajault, C.: Solving the ignoring problem for partial order reduction. Software Tools Technol. Transf.12(2), 155–170 (2010)

   Article  Google Scholar 

3. Eve, J., Kurki-Suonio, R.: On computing the transitive closure of a relation. Acta Informatica8(4), 303–314 (1977)

   Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

4. Gibson-Robinson, T., Hansen, H., Roscoe, A.W., Wang, X.: Practical partial order reduction for CSP. In: Havelund, K., Holzmann, G., Joshi, R. (eds.) NFM 2015. LNCS, vol. 9058, pp. 188–203. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-17524-9_14

   Google Scholar 

5. Godefroid, P.: Using partial orders to improve automatic verification methods. In: Clarke, E.M., Kurshan, R.P. (eds.) Computer-Aided Verification 1990, AMS-ACM DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 3, pp. 321–340 (1991)

   Google Scholar 

6. Godefroid, P. (ed.): Partial-Order Methods for the Verification of Concurrent Systems. LNCS, vol. 1032. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

   MATH  Google Scholar 

7. Hansen, H., Lin, S.-W., Liu, Y., Nguyen, T.K., Sun, J.: Diamonds are a girl’s best friend: partial order reduction for timed automata with abstractions. In: Biere, A., Bloem, R. (eds.) CAV 2014. LNCS, vol. 8559, pp. 391–406. Springer, Cham (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-08867-9_26

   Google Scholar 

8. Laarman, A., Pater, E., van de Pol, J., Weber, M.: Guard-based partial-order reduction. In: Bartocci, E., Ramakrishnan, C.R. (eds.) SPIN 2013. LNCS, vol. 7976, pp. 227–245. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39176-7_15

   Chapter  Google Scholar 

9. Mazurkiewicz, A.: Trace theory. In: Brauer, W., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ACPN 1986. LNCS, vol. 255, pp. 278–324. Springer, Heidelberg (1987). doi:10.1007/3-540-17906-2_30

   Chapter  Google Scholar 

10. Peled, D.: All from one, one for all: on model checking using representatives. In: Courcoubetis, C. (ed.) CAV 1993. LNCS, vol. 697, pp. 409–423. Springer, Heidelberg (1993). doi:10.1007/3-540-56922-7_34

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

11. Peled, D.: Ten years of partial order reduction. In: Hu, A.J., Vardi, M.Y. (eds.) CAV 1998. LNCS, vol. 1427, pp. 17–28. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). doi:10.1007/BFb0028727

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

12. Rauhamaa, M.: A comparative study of methods for efficient reachability analysis. Lic. Technical Thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Digital Systems Laboratory, Research Report A-14. Espoo, Finland (1990)

    Google Scholar 

13. Roscoe, A.W.: Understanding Concurrent Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-1-84882-258-0. 533 p.

    Book MATH  Google Scholar 

14. Tarjan, R.E.: Depth-first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM J. Comput.1(2), 146–160 (1972)

    Article MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

15. Valmari, A.: Error detection by reduced reachability graph generation. In: Proceedings of the 9th European Workshop on Application and Theory of Petri Nets, pp. 95–122 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

16. Valmari, A.: State Space Generation: Efficiency and Practicality. Dr. Technical Thesis, Tampere University of Technology Publications 55, Tampere (1988)

    Google Scholar 

17. Valmari, A.: Stubborn sets for reduced state space generation. In: Rozenberg, G. (ed.) ICATPN 1989. LNCS, vol. 483, pp. 491–515. Springer, Heidelberg (1991). doi:10.1007/3-540-53863-1_36

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

18. Valmari, A.: Stubborn set methods for process algebras. In: Peled, D., Pratt, V., Holzmann, G. (eds.) Partial Order Methods in Verification, Proceedings of a DIMACS Workshop, DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science vol. 29, pp. 213–231. American Mathematical Society (1997)

    Google Scholar 

19. Valmari, A.: The state explosion problem. In: Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) ACPN 1996. LNCS, vol. 1491, pp. 429–528. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). doi:10.1007/3-540-65306-6_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

20. Valmari, A.: Stop it, and be stubborn!. In: Haar, S., Meyer, R. (eds.) 15th International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design, pp. 10–19. IEEE Computer Society (2015)

    Google Scholar 

21. Valmari, A.: A state space tool for concurrent system models expressed in C++. In: Nummenmaa, J., Sievi-Korte, O., Mäkinen, E. (eds.) CEUR Workshop Proceedings of SPLST 2015, Symposium on Programming Languages and Software Tools, vol. 1525, pp. 91–105 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

22. Valmari, A.: Stop it, and be stubborn!. ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst.16(2), 46:1–46:26 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

23. Valmari, A.: More stubborn set methods for process algebras. In: Gibson-Robinson, T., Hopcroft, P., Lazić, R. (eds.) Concurrency, Security, and Puzzles. LNCS, vol. 10160, pp. 246–271. Springer, Cham (2017). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-51046-0_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

24. Valmari, A., Hansen, H.: Can stubborn sets be optimal? Fundam. Informaticae113(3–4), 377–397 (2011)

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

25. Valmari, A., Hansen, H.: Stubborn set intuition explained. In: Cabac, L., Kristensen, L.M., Rölke, H. (eds.) CEUR Workshop Proceedings of the International Workshop on Petri Nets and Software Engineering 2016, vol. 1591, pp. 213–232 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

26. Valmari, A., Vogler, W.: Fair testing and stubborn sets. In: Bošnački, D., Wijs, A. (eds.) SPIN 2016. LNCS, vol. 9641, pp. 225–243. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-32582-8_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

27. Varpaaniemi, K.: On the Stubborn Set Method in Reduced State Space Generation. Ph.D. Thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Digital Systems Laboratory Research Report A-51, Espoo, Finland (1998)

    Google Scholar 

Download references