Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Gianluca Barbon
dblp:168/1123
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
4as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
0000-0001-8531-4268ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 3 first-author · 1 since 2021Computer networks · 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 |
Debugging and program repair · 77% Program verification · 23% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Debugging and program repair
fault localization |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Debugging of Behavioural Models using Counterexample Analysis · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2021 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
model checking |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Debugging of Behavioural Models using Counterexample Analysis · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2021 |
Program verification › model checking
counterexample analysis |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Debugging of Behavioural Models using Counterexample Analysis · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
counterexample analysis · 1.0abstraction techniques · 1.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Debugging of Behavioural Models using Counterexample AnalysisabstractModel checking is an established technique for automatically verifying that a model satisfies a given temporal property. When the model violates the property, the model checker returns a counterexample, which is a sequence of actions leading to a state where the property is not satisfied. Understanding this counterexample for debugging the specification is a complicated task for several reasons: (i) the counterexample can contain a large number of actions, (ii) the debugging task is mostly achieved manually, and (iii) the counterexample does not explicitly highlight the source of the bug that is hidden in the model. This article presents a new approach that improves the usability of model checking by simplifying the comprehension of counterexamples. To do so, we first extract in the model all the counterexamples. Second, we define an analysis algorithm that identifies actions that make the model skip from incorrect to correct behaviours, making these actions relevant from a debugging perspective. Third, we develop a set of abstraction techniques to extract these actions from counterexamples. Our approach is fully automated by a tool we implemented and was applied on real-world case studies from various application areas for evaluation purposes. Gianluca Barbon, Vincent Leroy 0001, Gwen Salaün |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 1 |
| 2019 | Debugging of Behavioural Models with CLEARabstractThis paper presents a tool for debugging behavioural models being analysed using model checking techniques. It consists of three parts: (i) one for annotating a behavioural model given a temporal formula, (ii) one for visualizing the erroneous part of the model with a specific focus on decision points that make the model to be correct or incorrect, and (iii) one for abstracting counterexamples thus providing an explanation of the source of the bug. Gianluca Barbon, Vincent Leroy 0001, Gwen Salaün |
TACAS (1) | 1 |
| 2018 | Counterexample Simplification for Liveness Property Violation
Gianluca Barbon, Vincent Leroy 0001, Gwen Salaün |
SEFM | 1 |
| 2016 | Taking Arduino to the Internet of Things: The ASIP programming model
Gianluca Barbon, Michael Margolis, Filippo Palumbo, Franco Raimondi, Nick Weldin |
Comput. Commun. | 1 |