Talk:Petri net

Citation needed on Introduction
The reference section of this article point to several mathematical paper on Petri nets. Petri nets have limitations and various form exist to try and address the limitation of the instantaneous/timed petri nets. However, the reference section clearly shows several mathematical papers on a formalism to Petri nets. This is to contrast with a UML sequence diagram which is only a pictorial to diagram the information or execution flow, but may not be able to 'prove' anything more advanced that what is depicted in the diagram. This contrast to a Petri net where properties can be derived from the diagram. Is the reference section a suitable citation? The tagger who left no text here seems to want an article on the articles in the reference section. 184.144.115.253 (talk) 15:18, 26 March 2022 (UTC)


 * In fact the whole article is rather mathematically based. There is little on the pragmatic application of a Petri net.  This is completely counter to what is on the UML Sequence diagram page.  The next topic is this talk page is referring to the article as too pendantic.  As well, Petri Net is assigned to the 'mathematics category' and a sequence diagram is not. It seems clearly more mathematical/formal and I am left to wonder why it was tagged?  Maybe User:Ahmadadam96 could explain? 184.144.115.253 (talk) 15:44, 26 March 2022 (UTC)


 * https://projects.laas.fr/tina/papers.php provides at least 24 possible references. 184.146.224.243 (talk) 12:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Pedantic
This page seems overly pedantic. The opening, for instance, is filled with terms needing additional clarification:

discrete distributed systems generalize automata theory

Seems like a simpler, clearer statement is needed--and I'm not qualified! Can someone make this accessible to a layman like me?


 * No problemo! I'll get right on it. Vonkje 03:04, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I think the graphic relating to state machines would be helpful to move to the introduction. This frames why Petri nets are more complex.  It is difficult to make a complex topic simple.  A simple example might help.  Customers at a bank/DMV/waterslide and the number of employees/slides needed to keep the customer queue short? 184.144.115.253 (talk) 15:33, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

"Also known as"
Vonkje, I am not happy with the "also known as" clauses in your formal definition. E.g., a place is not a "file" or "other container", it is a place, an abstract notion. Similarly, I think your introduction uses the word transaction where it really doesn't belong. (One of the problems with Petri nets is that they cannot easily express transactions.)
 * yer right! ... I'll 'up 'n fix it. Vonkje 20:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The formal part is good, although I have never seen a separation between arcs and arc weights before, nor have I seen the use of place capacities; I would suggest to omit the latter. Can you give a reference for this definition?

--Rp 17:17, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I hadn't seen the separation either, until I attended a tutorial by Jörg Desel at the 4th ACPN in 2003. ... makes sense when you think about it more.  The paper is called "What is a Petri Net" by Desel and Juhás.


 * By the way: Warm greetings from Leiden to Eindhoven (though I'm here in Florida for the summer). Vonkje 20:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lay introduction needed
I learnt a bit about formal methods years ago. I would like to understand Petri Nets better with some simple examples.

In general, I think Wikipedia needs a 'Lay Introduction' section in most technical articles. So often, as in this case, we very quickly get so technical most interested lay people will quickly get put off.

The examples used are usually from computing systems. That is fine for the specialist and they provide valuable information. For a lay person however, some simple examples from everyday life would be much more helpful to start with.

I think a couple of recipes for cooking would be good. In particular illustrating how parallelism is built into Petri Nets and show how many aspects of moderately complex recipes can be done in an arbitrary order, but with some key dependencies.

To get a grip on the notation, a very simple example, like making two cups of tea using things like: the people making and consuming the tea, a tea pot, tea bags, sugar, milk, spoon, cup, saucer, kettle, etc.. This is probably already too complex for a simple example.

I'm sure there are plenty of simple everyday examples that would be good. I suspect cooking has a lot of potential and will be accessible to many people. I even think there might be a real role for a Petri-Net based online recipe tool, helping people get organised at the start of a recipe, giving them choice of what to do when and help them see the implications. 82.46.119.89 (talk) 09:33, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Nitpick
the "graph that has two types of elements: places and transitions" in the introductory paragraph should be changed to say "graph that has two types of nodes: places and transitions.". Because elements, they are more (arcs, weights, etc). But the *nodes* of the graph are two types. Just my twopence, not expert in Petri nets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaurV (talk • contribs) 02:09, 4 July 2024 (UTC)