Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
W. P. Weijland
dblp:12/4278 · also Peter Weijland
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 1996
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 3 · 2 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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 |
Concurrent programming · 50% Programming languages and type systems · 50% | |
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Logic in computer science · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Programming languages and type systems › program equivalence
contextual equivalence |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | Branching Time and Abstraction in Bisimulation Semantics · J. ACM 1996 |
Concurrent programming › concurrency theory
process calculi |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | Branching Time and Abstraction in Bisimulation Semantics · J. ACM 1996 |
Logic in computer science › process algebra
process semantics |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | Branching Time and Abstraction in Bisimulation Semantics · J. ACM 1996 |
Logic in computer science › logic programming
logic programming semantics |
0.0 | 1 | 1988 | Semantics for Logic Programs without Occur Check · ICALP 1988 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
bisimulation semantics · 0.0CCS · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1996 | Branching Time and Abstraction in Bisimulation SemanticsabstractIn comparative concurrency semantics, one usually distinguishes between linear time and branching time semantic equivalences. Milner's notion of observatin equivalence is often mentioned as the standard example of a branching time equivalence. In this paper we investigate whether observation equivalence really does respect the branching structure of processes, and find that in the presence of the unobservable action τ of CCS this is not the case. Therefore, the notion of branching bisimulation equivalence is introduced which strongly preserves the branching structure of processes, in the sense that it preserves computations together with the potentials in all intermediate states that are passed through, even if silent moves are involved. On closed CCS-terms branching bisimulation congruence can be completely axiomatized by the single axion scheme: a.(τ.(y+z)+y)=a.(y+z) (where a ranges over all actions) and the usual loaws for strong congruence. We also establish that for sequential processes observation equivalence is not preserved under refinement of actions, whereas branching bisimulation is. For a large class of processes, it turns out that branching bisimulation and observation equivalence are the same. As far as we know, all protocols that have been verified in the setting of observation equivalence happen to fit in this class, and hence are also valid in the stronger setting of branching bisimulation equivalence. Rob J. van Glabbeek, W. P. Weijland |
J. ACM | 2 |
| 1990 | Semantics for Logic Programs Without Occur Check
W. P. Weijland |
Theor. Comput. Sci. | 1 |
| 1989 | Term-Rewriting Systems with Rule Priorities
Jos C. M. Baeten, Jan A. Bergstra, Jan Willem Klop, W. P. Weijland |
Theor. Comput. Sci. | 4 |
| 1988 | Semantics for Logic Programs without Occur Check
W. P. Weijland |
ICALP | 1 |