<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Benchmarking Software Model Checkers on Automotive Code · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2003.11689/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2003.11689/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Benchmarking Software Model Checkers on Automotive Code — mentioned by naasking</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34936485</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2003.11689:34936485</guid><pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2023 13:25:07 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Good reference, I had actually starred that on github to refer to later and totally forgot about it. Do you know of a review of the various open source verification tools available for C? The ones I&amp;#x27;m aware of: CBMC, Frama-C, VeriFast, ESBMC. I&amp;#x27;ve found papers like [1] which benchmark various model checkers, but no evaluation of the verification effort required for the various approaches. Edit: the tutorial for VeriFast does not make it look very usable compared to Frama-C&amp;#x27;s ACSL language. Their tutorial doesn&amp;#x27;t explain a bunch of the syntax or why they made certain choices, so it all feels…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2003.11689/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LO</category></item></channel></rss>
