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

Yoshiaki Miyazaki

dblp:21/10607 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2011
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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 analysis · 56% Program verification · 44%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification › model checking
software model checking
0.112011
DC2: A framework for scalable, scope-bounded software verification · ASE 2011
Program analysis
specification mining
0.112011
DC2: A framework for scalable, scope-bounded software verification · ASE 2011
Program analysis
static analysis
0.012011
DC2: A framework for scalable, scope-bounded software verification · ASE 2011

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

stub inference · 0.1specification inference · 0.1false alarm refinement · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2011 DC2: A framework for scalable, scope-bounded software verification
abstract
Software model checking and static analysis have matured over the last decade, enabling their use in automated software verification. However, lack of scalability makes these tools hard to apply. Furthermore, approximations in the models of program and environment lead to a profusion of false alarms. This paper proposes DC2, a verification framework using scope-bounding to bridge these gaps. DC2 splits the analysis problem into manageable parts, relying on a combination of three automated techniques: (a) techniques to infer useful specifications for functions in the form of pre- and post-conditions; (b) stub inference techniques that infer abstractions to replace function calls beyond the verification scope; and (c) automatic refinement of pre- and post-conditions from false alarms identified by a user. DC2 enables iterative reasoning over the calling environment, to help in finding non-trivial bugs and fewer false alarms. We present an experimental evaluation that demonstrates the effectiveness of DC2 on several open-source and industrial software projects.
Franjo Ivancic, Gogul Balakrishnan, Aarti Gupta, Sriram Sankaranarayanan 0001, Naoto Maeda, Hiroki Tokuoka, Takashi Imoto, Yoshiaki Miyazaki
ASE8