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

Mark Pape

dblp:08/496 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2008
—ORCID · none

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
Software testing · 38% Program analysis · 38% Program verification · 23%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Embedded and real-time systems · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program analysis
symbolic execution
0.112008
Combining unit-level symbolic execution and system-level concrete execution for testing NASA software · ISSTA 2008
Software testing
test generation
0.112008
Combining unit-level symbolic execution and system-level concrete execution for testing NASA software · ISSTA 2008
Program verification
model checking
0.012008
Combining unit-level symbolic execution and system-level concrete execution for testing NASA software · ISSTA 2008
Program verification › model checking
symbolic model checking
0.012008
Combining unit-level symbolic execution and system-level concrete execution for testing NASA software · ISSTA 2008
Embedded and real-time systems › critical systems
safety-critical software
0.012008
Combining unit-level symbolic execution and system-level concrete execution for testing NASA software · ISSTA 2008

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

symbolic execution · 0.2model checking · 0.2concrete execution · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2008 Combining unit-level symbolic execution and system-level concrete execution for testing NASA software
abstract
We describe an approach to testing complex safety critical software that combines unit-level symbolic execution and system-level concrete execution for generating test cases that satisfy user-specified testing criteria. We have developed Symbolic Java PathFinder, a symbolic execution framework that implements a non-standard bytecode interpreter on top of the Java PathFinder model checking tool. The framework propagates the symbolic information via attributes associated with the program data. Furthermore, we use two techniques that leverage system-level concrete program executions to gather information about a unit's input to improve the precision of the unit-level test case generation. We applied our approach to testing a prototype NASA flight software component. Our analysis helped discover a serious bug that resulted in design changes to the software. Although we give our presentation in the context of a NASA project, we believe that our work is relevant for other critical systems that require thorough testing.
Corina Pasareanu, Peter C. Mehlitz, David H. Bushnell, Karen Gundy-Burlet, Michael R. Lowry, Suzette Person, Mark Pape
ISSTA7