Papers › Model Checking Finite-Horizon Markov Chains with Probabilistic Inference

Model Checking Finite-Horizon Markov Chains with Probabilistic Inference

26 May 2021arXiv:2105.12326links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Steven Holtzen, Sebastian Junges, Marcell Vazquez-Chanlatte, Todd Millstein, Sanjit A. Seshia, Guy Van Den Broeck

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

We revisit the symbolic verification of Markov chains with respect to finite horizon reachability properties. The prevalent approach iteratively computes step-bounded state reachability probabilities. By contrast, recent advances in probabilistic inference suggest symbolically representing all horizon-length paths through the Markov chain. We ask whether this perspective advances the state-of-the-art in probabilistic model checking. First, we formally describe both approaches in order to highlight their key differences. Then, using these insights we develop Rubicon, a tool that transpiles Prism models to the probabilistic inference tool Dice. Finally, we demonstrate better scalability compared to probabilistic model checkers on selected benchmarks. All together, our results suggest that probabilistic inference is a valuable addition to the probabilistic model checking portfolio -- with Rubicon as a first step towards integrating both perspectives.

PaperPDFCode

Code

sjunges/rubicon officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHub report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections