Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Shane Magrath
dblp:77/4289
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021
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 |
Software testing · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing
fuzzing |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Seed selection for successful fuzzing · ISSTA 2021 |
Software testing › fuzzing › seed scheduling
seed selection |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Seed selection for successful fuzzing · ISSTA 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
mutation-based fuzzing · 0.5greybox fuzzing · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Seed selection for successful fuzzingabstractMutation-based greybox fuzzing---unquestionably the most widely-used fuzzing technique---relies on a set of non-crashing seed inputs (a corpus) to bootstrap the bug-finding process. When evaluating a fuzzer, common approaches for constructing this corpus include: (i) using an empty file; (ii) using a single seed representative of the target's input format; or (iii) collecting a large number of seeds (e.g., by crawling the Internet). Little thought is given to how this seed choice affects the fuzzing process, and there is no consensus on which approach is best (or even if a best approach exists). Adrian Herrera, Hendra Gunadi, Shane Magrath, Michael Norrish, Mathias Payer, Antony L. Hosking |
ISSTA | 3 |
| 2005 | Autonomics in telecommunications service activationabstractThe motivation for this paper is to extend the state of the art in distributed autonomics praxis as applied to telecommunications network management. We describe how the task assignment problem, common in telecommunications service activation workflow processes, can be effectively solved through the use of distributed autonomic auction agents. In doing so, we present our telecommunications service architecture that locates autonomic mechanisms. We describe a formal framework for the autonomic mechanism based on Holland's adaptation theory. We then present the results of an experimental simulation study that shows that the autonomic mechanism provides near optimal performance for the problem, whilst conferring significant advantages over other common implementations in terms of robustness, scalability and disaster recovery. We conclude that autonomic mechanisms confer significant advantages to TMN, but it does so by hiding complexity rather than simplifying the system operations as has sometimes been reported. Shane Magrath, Frank Chiang, Shmuel Markovits, Robin Braun, Fernando Cuervo |
ISADS | 1 |