Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Roong-Ko Doong
dblp:13/6747
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2006
—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-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
2 papers |
Software testing · 84% Program analysis · 16% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing
test input generation |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | From daikon to agitator: lessons and challenges in building a commercial tool for developer testing · ISSTA 2006 |
Program analysis › specification mining
dynamic invariant detection |
0.0 | 1 | 2006 | From daikon to agitator: lessons and challenges in building a commercial tool for developer testing · ISSTA 2006 |
Software testing
object-oriented testing |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | The ASTOOT Approach to Testing Object-Oriented Programs · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 1994 |
Software testing
test generation |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | The ASTOOT Approach to Testing Object-Oriented Programs · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 1994 |
Software testing
unit testing |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | The ASTOOT Approach to Testing Object-Oriented Programs · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 1994 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
software agitation · 0.1dynamic invariant detection · 0.1equivalence checking · 0.0algebraic specification · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | From daikon to agitator: lessons and challenges in building a commercial tool for developer testingabstractDeveloper testing is of one of the most effective strategies for improving the quality of software, reducing its cost, and accelerating its development. Despite its widely recognized benefits, developer testing is practiced by only a minority of developers. The slow adoption of developer testing is primarily due to the lack of tools that automate some of the more tedious and time-consuming aspects of this practice. Motivated by the need for a solution, and helped and inspired by the research in software test automation, we created a developer testing tool based on software agitation. Software agitation is a testing technique that combines the results of research in test-input generation and dynamic invariant detection. We implemented software agitation in a commercial testing tool called Agitator. This paper gives a high-level overview of software agitation and its implementation in Agitator, focusing on the lessons and challenges of leveraging and applying the results of research to the implementation of a commercial product. Marat Boshernitsan, Roong-Ko Doong, Alberto Savoia |
ISSTA | 2 |
| 1994 | The ASTOOT Approach to Testing Object-Oriented ProgramsabstractThis article describes a new approach to the unit testing of object-oriented programs, a set of tools based on this approach, and two case studies. In this approach, each test case consists of a tuple of sequences of messages, along with tags indicating whether these sequences should put objects of the class under test into equivalent states and/or return objects that are in equivalent states. Tests are executed by sending the sequences to objects of the class under test, then invoking a user-supplied equivalence-checking mechanism. This approach allows for substantial automation of many aspects of testing, including test case generation, test driver generation, test execution, and test checking. Experimental prototypes of tools for test generation and test execution are described. The test generation tool requires the availability of an algebraic specification of the abstract data type being tested, but the test execution tool can be used when no formal specification is available. Using the test execution tools, case studies involving execution of tens of thousands of test cases, with various sequence lengths, parameters, and combinations of operations were performed. The relationships among likelihood of detecting an error and sequence length, range of parameters, and relative frequency of various operations were investigated for priority queue and sorted-list implementations having subtle errors. In each case, long sequences tended to be more likely to detect the error, provided that the range of parameters was sufficiently large and likelihood of detecting an error tended to increase up to a threshold value as the parameter range increased. Roong-Ko Doong, Phyllis G. Frankl |
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. | 1 |