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.

François Roucoux

dblp:05/7056 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2009
0009-0007-1168-0688ORCID · reported

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 verification · 67% Software maintenance and evolution · 33%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification
model checking
0.112009
Analyzing critical process models through behavior model synthesis · ICSE 2009
Software maintenance and evolution
process model analysis
0.112009
Analyzing critical process models through behavior model synthesis · ICSE 2009
Program verification › model checking
process model verification
0.112009
Analyzing critical process models through behavior model synthesis · ICSE 2009
Automated reasoning and model checking
invariant generation
0.012009
Analyzing critical process models through behavior model synthesis · ICSE 2009

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

model checking · 0.2invariant generation · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2009 Analyzing critical process models through behavior model synthesis
abstract
Process models capture tasks performed by agents together with their control flow. Building and analyzing such models is important but difficult in certain areas such as safety-critical healthcare processes. Tool-supported techniques are needed to find and correct flaws in such processes. On another hand, event-based formalisms such as Labeled Transition Systems (LTS) prove effective for analyzing agent behaviors. The paper describes a blend of state-based and event-based techniques for analyzing task models involving decisions. The input models are specified as guarded high-level message sequence charts, a language allowing us to integrate material provided by stakeholders such as multi-agent scenarios, decision trees, and flowchart fragments. The input models are compiled into guarded LTS, where transition guards on fluents support the integration of state-based and event-based analysis. The techniques supported by our tool include model checking against process-specific properties, invariant generation, and the detection of incompleteness, unreachability, and undesirable non-determinism in process decisions. They are based on a trace semantics of process models, defined in terms of guarded LTS, which are in turn defined in terms of pure LTS. The techniques complement our previous palette for synthesizing behavior models from scenarios and goals. The paper also describes our preliminary experience in analyzing cancer treatment processes using these techniques.
Christophe Damas, Bernard Lambeau, François Roucoux, Axel van Lamsweerde
ICSE3