Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Niels Damgaard

dblp:00/3598 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2001
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1Theory of computation · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Program verification · 67% Program analysis · 33%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Embedded and real-time systems · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification
model checking
0.012001
Static Checking of Interrupt-Driven Software · ICSE 2001
Program verification › model checking
pushdown systems
0.012001
Static Checking of Interrupt-Driven Software · ICSE 2001
Program analysis
static analysis
0.012001
Static Checking of Interrupt-Driven Software · ICSE 2001
Embedded and real-time systems › event-driven systems
interrupt-driven programs
0.012001
Static Checking of Interrupt-Driven Software · ICSE 2001
Embedded and real-time systems
real-time software
0.012001
Static Checking of Interrupt-Driven Software · ICSE 2001

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

model checking of pushdown systems · 0.1control flow graph analysis · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2001 Static Checking of Interrupt-Driven Software
abstract
Resource-constrained devices are becoming ubiquitous. Examples include cell phones, Palm Pilots and digital thermostats. It can be difficult to fit the required functionality into such a device without sacrificing the simplicity and clarity of the software. Increasingly complex embedded systems require extensive brute-force testing, making development and maintenance costly. This is particularly true for system components that are written in assembly language. Static checking has the potential of alleviating these problems, but until now there has been little tool support for programming at the assembly level. In this paper, we present the design and implementation of a static checker for interrupt-driven Z86-based software with hard real-time requirements. For six commercial microcontrollers, our checker has produced upper bounds on interrupt latencies and stack sizes, as well as verified fundamental safety and liveness properties. Our approach is based on a known algorithm for the model checking of pushdown systems and produces a control-flow graph annotated with information about time, space, safety and liveness. Each benchmark is approximately 1000 lines of code, and the checking is done in a few seconds on a standard PC. Our tool is one of the first to give an efficient and useful static analysis of assembly code. It enables increased confidence in code correctness, significantly reduced testing requirements and support for maintenance throughout the system life-cycle.
Dennis Brylow, Niels Damgaard, Jens Palsberg
ICSE2
1999 Yakyak: parsing with logical side constraints
Nils Klarlund, Niels Damgaard, Michael I. Schwartzbach
Developments in Language Theory2