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

Carlos Sáenz-Adán

dblp:166/2401 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0003-2485-3182ORCID · reported

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author

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
Requirements engineering and software design · 61% Program analysis · 30% Compilers and program optimization · 9%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Requirements engineering and software design
model-driven engineering
0.612022
Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022
Program analysis
provenance capture
0.612022
Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022
Requirements engineering and software design › model-driven engineering
UML-based design
0.612022
Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022
Compilers and program optimization
program instrumentation
0.212022
Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022

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

pattern mapping · 0.6model-driven development · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience
abstract
In response to the increasing calls for algorithmic accountability, UML2PROV is a novel approach to address the existing gap between application design, where models are described by UML diagrams, and provenance design, where generated provenance is meant to describe an application's flows of data, processes and responsibility, enabling greater accountability of this application. The originality of UML2PROV is that designers are allowed to follow their preferred software engineering methodology to create the UML Diagrams for their application, while UML2PROV takes the UML diagrams as a starting point to automatically generate: (1) the design of the provenance to be generated (expressed asPROV templates); and (2) the software library for collecting runtime values of interest (encoded as variable-value associations known asbindings), which can be deployed in the application without developer intervention. At runtime, the PROV templates combined with the bindings are used to generate high-quality provenance suitable for subsequent consumption. UML2PROV is rigorously defined by an extensive set of 17 patterns mapping UML diagrams to provenance templates, and is accompanied by a reference implementation based on Model Driven Development techniques. A systematic evaluation of UML2PROV uses quantitative data and qualitative arguments to show the benefits and trade-offs of applying UML2PROV for software engineers seeking to make applications provenance-aware. In particular, as the UML design drives both the design and capture of provenance, we discuss how the levels of detail in UML designs affect aspects such as provenance design generation, application instrumentation, provenance capability maintenance, storage and run-time overhead, and quality of the generated provenance. Some key lessons are learned such as: starting from a non-tailored UML design leads to the capture of more provenance than required to satisfy provenance requirements and therefore, increases the overhead unnecessarily; alternatively, if the UML design is tailored to focus on addressing provenance requirements, only relevant provenance gets to be collected, resulting in lower overheads.
Carlos Sáenz-Adán, Beatriz Pérez 0001, Francisco J. García Izquierdo, Luc Moreau 0001
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1
2018 UML2PROV: Automating Provenance Capture in Software Engineering
Carlos Sáenz-Adán, Beatriz Pérez 0001, Trung Dong Huynh, Luc Moreau 0001
SOFSEM1
2018 A systematic review of provenance systems
Beatriz Pérez 0001, Julio Rubio 0001, Carlos Sáenz-Adán
Knowl. Inf. Syst.3