Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Michael Marmar
dblp:133/3611
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory 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 · 93% Concurrent programming · 7% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program verification
concurrent program verification |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013 |
Program verification › program logic › separation logic
concurrent separation logic |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013 |
Program verification
program logic |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013 |
Program verification › correctness proof
total correctness |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013 |
Concurrent programming › non-blocking algorithms
non-blocking data structures |
0.0 | 1 | 2013 | Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-Freedom · LICS 2013 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
rely-guarantee reasoning · 0.2quantitative reasoning · 0.2affine tokens · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | Quantitative Reasoning for Proving Lock-FreedomabstractThis article describes a novel quantitative proof technique for the modular and local verification of lock-freedom. In contrast to proofs based on temporal rely-guarantee requirements, this new quantitative reasoning method can be directly integrated in modern program logics that are designed for the verification of safety properties. Using a single formalism for verifying memory safety and lock-freedom allows a combined correctness proof that verifies both properties simultaneously. This article presents one possible formalization of this quantitative proof technique by developing a variant of concurrent separation logic (CSL) for total correctness. To enable quantitative reasoning, CSL is extended with a predicate for affine tokens to account for, and provide an upper bound on the number of loop iterations in a program. Lock-freedom is then reduced to total-correctness proofs. Quantitative reasoning is demonstrated in detail, both informally and formally, by verifying the lock-freedom of Treiber's non-blocking stack. Furthermore, it is shown how the technique is used to verify the lock-freedom of more advanced shared-memory data structures that use elimination-backoff schemes and hazard-pointers. Jan Hoffmann 0002, Michael Marmar, Zhong Shao 0001 |
LICS | 2 |