Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ashvin Dsouza
dblp:78/4985
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2005
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-authorTheory of computation · 2 · 2 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 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.
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 50% Logic in computer science · 32% Coding theory · 18% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Programming languages and type systems · 100% |
Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Automated reasoning and model checking
model checking |
0.0 | 2 | 1997 | Using a Protean Language to Enhance Expressiveness in Specification · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1997 Generating BDD Models for Process Algebra Terms · CAV 1995 |
Programming languages and type systems › language semantics › formal semantics
operational semantics |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Using a Protean Language to Enhance Expressiveness in Specification · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1997 |
Programming languages and type systems
specification language |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Using a Protean Language to Enhance Expressiveness in Specification · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1997 |
Coding theory › error-correcting codes › decoding › minimum distance decoding
bounded-distance decoding |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Using a Protean Language to Enhance Expressiveness in Specification · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1997 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › symbolic model checking
BDD-based model checking |
0.0 | 1 | 1995 | Generating BDD Models for Process Algebra Terms · CAV 1995 |
Logic in computer science
process algebra |
0.0 | 1 | 1995 | Generating BDD Models for Process Algebra Terms · CAV 1995 |
Logic in computer science › process algebra
process semantics |
0.0 | 1 | 1995 | Generating BDD Models for Process Algebra Terms · CAV 1995 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
abstraction refinement |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Using a Protean Language to Enhance Expressiveness in Specification · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1997 |
Logic in computer science › formal specification
refinement |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Using a Protean Language to Enhance Expressiveness in Specification · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1997 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
binary decision diagrams · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | Supporting sequential assumptions in hybrid verificationabstractWe present a method for using a set of temporal properties (SVA, PSL, OVA, RTL monitors) as environment models for industrial-strength hybrid verification that combines formal methods with constrained random simulation. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the method on real-world designs. Eduard Cerny, Ashvin Dsouza, Kevin Harer, Pei-Hsin Ho, Hi-Keung Tony Ma |
ASP-DAC | 2 |
| 1997 | Using a Protean Language to Enhance Expressiveness in SpecificationabstractA Protean specification language (B. Bloom, 1995) based on structured operational semantics (SOS) allows the user to invent appropriate operations to improve abstraction and readability. This is in contrast to traditional specification languages, where the set of operations is fixed. An efficient algorithm, described by A. Dsouza and B. Bloom (1995), uses binary decision diagrams (BDDs) to verify properties of finite specifications written in a Protean language and provides the basis for a model checker we have developed. The paper provides a synthesis of our work on Protean languages and relates the work to other specification techniques. We show how abstraction and refinement in the Protean framework can improve the effectiveness of model checking. We rewrite and verify properties of an existing Z specification by defining suitable operations. We also show how a Protean language can be used to model restricted I/O automata, action refinement, and 1-safe and k-bounded Petri nets. Bard Bloom, Allan Cheng, Ashvin Dsouza |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 3 |
| 1995 | Generating BDD Models for Process Algebra Terms
Ashvin Dsouza, Bard Bloom |
CAV | 1 |
| 1995 | On the Expressive Power of CCS
Ashvin Dsouza, Bard Bloom |
FSTTCS | 1 |