VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Christina Jansen
dblp:75/9687
· DBLP profile ↗
10ranked-venue papers
4as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 6 · 1 first-authorTheory of computation · 5 · 3 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 2 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.
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Program verification · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program verification
pointer program verification |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Let this Graph Be Your Witness! - An Attestor for Verifying Java Pointer Programs · CAV (2) 2018 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › temporal logic model checking
LTL model checking |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Let this Graph Be Your Witness! - An Attestor for Verifying Java Pointer Programs · CAV (2) 2018 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking
temporal logic model checking |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Let this Graph Be Your Witness! - An Attestor for Verifying Java Pointer Programs · CAV (2) 2018 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
graph grammar · 0.7abstract state space generation · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Let this Graph Be Your Witness! - An Attestor for Verifying Java Pointer ProgramsabstractWe present a graph-based tool for analysing Java programs operating on dynamic data structures. It involves the generation of an abstract state space employing a user-defined graph grammar. LTL model checking is then applied to this state space, supporting both structural and functional correctness properties. The analysis is fully automated, procedure-modular, and provides informative visual feedback including counterexamples in the case of property violations. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves. Hannah Arndt, Christina Jansen, Joost-Pieter Katoen, Christoph Matheja, Thomas Noll 0001 |
CAV (2) | 2 |
| 2018 | Graph-Based Shape Analysis Beyond Context-Freeness
Hannah Arndt, Christina Jansen, Christoph Matheja, Thomas Noll 0001 |
SEFM | 2 |
| 2017 | Unified Reasoning About Robustness Properties of Symbolic-Heap Separation Logic
Christina Jansen, Jens Pagel, Christoph Matheja, Thomas Noll 0001, Florian Zuleger |
ESOP | 1 |
| 2015 | Tree-Like Grammars and Separation Logic
Christoph Matheja, Christina Jansen, Thomas Noll 0001 |
APLAS | 2 |
| 2015 | Juggrnaut: using graph grammars for abstracting unbounded heap structures
Jonathan Heinen, Christina Jansen, Joost-Pieter Katoen, Thomas Noll 0001 |
Formal Methods Syst. Des. | 2 |
| 2015 | Verifying pointer programs using graph grammars
Jonathan Heinen, Christina Jansen, Joost-Pieter Katoen, Thomas Noll 0001 |
Sci. Comput. Program. | 2 |
| 2014 | Generating Inductive Predicates for Symbolic Execution of Pointer-Manipulating Programs
Christina Jansen, Florian Göbe, Thomas Noll 0001 |
ICGT | 1 |
| 2014 | Generating Abstract Graph-Based Procedure Summaries for Pointer Programs
Christina Jansen, Thomas Noll 0001 |
ICGT | 1 |
| 2013 | Incremental Construction of Greibach Normal FormabstractThis paper presents an incremental version of the well-known algorithm for constructing the Greibach normal form (GNF) of a context-free string grammar. It supports the extension of the grammar by additional rules without the need of reperforming the GNF construction from scratch. Thus it offers an efficiency advantage over the classical GNF algorithm in use cases where grammars are extended at a later stage. It ensures that nonterminals and production rules once generated during GNF construction are not removed due to recomputation of GNF, thus preserving the structure of derivations. We present a commandline tool implementing both the classical and the incremental GNF algorithm and compare both by means of two case studies. Markus Bals, Christina Jansen, Thomas Noll 0001 |
TASE | 2 |
| 2011 | A Local Greibach Normal Form for Hyperedge Replacement Grammars
Christina Jansen, Jonathan Heinen, Joost-Pieter Katoen, Thomas Noll 0001 |
LATA | 1 |