Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Yoko Ampo
dblp:58/5851
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1998
—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 |
Requirements engineering and software design · 100% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Embedded and real-time systems · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Requirements engineering and software design › formal specification
requirements formalization |
0.0 | 1 | 1998 | Experiences Using Lightweight Formal Methods for Requirements Modeling · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1998 |
Requirements engineering and software design
requirements modeling |
0.0 | 1 | 1998 | Experiences Using Lightweight Formal Methods for Requirements Modeling · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1998 |
Requirements engineering and software design
requirements validation |
0.0 | 1 | 1998 | Experiences Using Lightweight Formal Methods for Requirements Modeling · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1998 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
theorem proving · 0.0lightweight formal methods · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | Experiences Using Lightweight Formal Methods for Requirements ModelingabstractThe paper describes three case studies in the lightweight application of formal methods to requirements modeling for spacecraft fault protection systems. The case studies differ from previously reported applications of formal methods in that formal methods were applied very early in the requirements engineering process to validate the evolving requirements. The results were fed back into the projects to improve the informal specifications. For each case study, we describe what methods were applied, how they were applied, how much effort was involved, and what the findings were. In all three cases, formal methods enhanced the existing verification and validation processes by testing key properties of the evolving requirements and helping to identify weaknesses. We conclude that the benefits gained from early modeling of unstable requirements more than outweigh the effort needed to maintain multiple representations. Steve M. Easterbrook, Robyn R. Lutz, Richard Covington, John Kelly, Yoko Ampo, David Hamilton |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 5 |