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.
? Tutorial for this page

Yann Moffett

dblp:07/10257 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Program verification · 38% Software testing · 38% Requirements engineering and software design · 23%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Embedded and real-time systems · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › protocol testing
protocol conformance checking
0.212013
Verifying Protocol Conformance Using Software Model Checking for the Model-Driven Development of Embedded Systems · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2013
Program verification › model checking
software model checking
0.212013
Verifying Protocol Conformance Using Software Model Checking for the Model-Driven Development of Embedded Systems · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2013
Requirements engineering and software design
model-driven engineering
0.012013
Verifying Protocol Conformance Using Software Model Checking for the Model-Driven Development of Embedded Systems · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2013
Requirements engineering and software design › model-driven engineering › UML
UML state machines
0.012013
Verifying Protocol Conformance Using Software Model Checking for the Model-Driven Development of Embedded Systems · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2013

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

state space exploration · 0.3java pathfinder · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Verifying Protocol Conformance Using Software Model Checking for the Model-Driven Development of Embedded Systems
abstract
To facilitate modular development, the use of state machines has been proposed to specify the protocol (i.e., the sequence of messages) that each port of a component can engage in. The protocol conformance checking problem consists of determining whether the actual behavior of a component conforms to the protocol specifications on its ports. In this paper, we consider this problem in the context of the model-driven development (MDD) of embedded systems based on UML 2, in which UML 2 state machines are used to specify component behavior. We provide a definition of conformance which slightly extends those found in the literature and reduce the conformance check to a state space exploration. We describe a tool implementing the approach using the Java PathFinder software model checker and the MDD tool IBM Rational RoseRT, discuss its application to three case studies, and show how the tool repeatedly allowed us to find unexpected conformance errors with encouraging performance. We conclude that the approach is promising for supporting the modular development of embedded components in the context of industrial applications of MDD.
Yann Moffett, Jürgen Dingel, Alain Beaulieu
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1
2011 Verifying UML-RT Protocol Conformance Using Model Checking
Yann Moffett, Alain Beaulieu, Jürgen Dingel
MoDELS1