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

Daniel Poetzl

dblp:139/0911 · also Daniel Pötzl · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 5 · 1 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 1Theory of computation · 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
4 papers
Concurrent programming · 68% Program analysis · 32%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
GPUs and heterogeneous computing · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program analysis
static analysis
0.732017
Don't Sit on the Fence: A Static Analysis Approach to Automatic Fence Insertion · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 2017
Sound static deadlock analysis for C/Pthreads · ASE 2016
Don't Sit on the Fence - A Static Analysis Approach to Automatic Fence Insertion · CAV 2014
Concurrent programming
memory models
0.732017
Don't Sit on the Fence: A Static Analysis Approach to Automatic Fence Insertion · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 2017
GPU Concurrency: Weak Behaviours and Programming Assumptions · ASPLOS 2015
Don't Sit on the Fence - A Static Analysis Approach to Automatic Fence Insertion · CAV 2014
Concurrent programming › memory models
fence insertion
0.522017
Don't Sit on the Fence: A Static Analysis Approach to Automatic Fence Insertion · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 2017
Don't Sit on the Fence - A Static Analysis Approach to Automatic Fence Insertion · CAV 2014
Concurrent programming › concurrency bugs › deadlock
deadlock analysis
0.212016
Sound static deadlock analysis for C/Pthreads · ASE 2016
Concurrent programming
concurrency bugs
0.112016
Sound static deadlock analysis for C/Pthreads · ASE 2016
Concurrent programming
deadlock detection
0.112016
Sound static deadlock analysis for C/Pthreads · ASE 2016
GPUs and heterogeneous computing
GPU programming
0.112015
GPU Concurrency: Weak Behaviours and Programming Assumptions · ASPLOS 2015

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

static analysis · 0.5litmus testing · 0.4formal specification · 0.4fence insertion · 0.3thread-sensitive analysis · 0.2dependency analysis · 0.2context-sensitive analysis · 0.2abstract interpretation · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2017 Don't Sit on the Fence: A Static Analysis Approach to Automatic Fence Insertion
abstract
Modern architectures rely on memory fences to prevent undesired weakenings of memory consistency. As the fences’ semantics may be subtle, the automation of their placement is highly desirable. But precise methods for restoring consistency do not scale to deployed systems’ code. We choose to trade some precision for genuine scalability: our technique is suitable for large code bases. We implement it in our new musketeer tool and report experiments on more than 700 executables from packages found in Debian GNU/Linux 7.1, including memcached with about 10,000 LoC.
Jade Alglave, Daniel Kroening, Vincent Nimal, Daniel Poetzl
ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst.4
2016 Sound static deadlock analysis for C/Pthreads
abstract
We present a static deadlock analysis approach for C/pthreads. The design of our method has been guided by the requirement to analyse real-world code. Our approach is sound (i.e., misses no deadlocks) for programs that have defined behaviour according to the C standard and the pthreads specification, and is precise enough to prove deadlock-freedom for a large number of such programs. The method consists of a pipeline of several analyses that build on a new context- and thread-sensitive abstract interpretation framework. We further present a lightweight dependency analysis to identify statements relevant to deadlock analysis and thus speed up the overall analysis. In our experimental evaluation, we succeeded to prove deadlock-freedom for 292 programs from the Debian GNU/Linux distribution with in total 2.3 MLOC in 4 hours.
Daniel Kroening, Daniel Poetzl, Peter Schrammel, Björn Wachter
ASE2
2016 Formalizing and Checking Thread Refinement for Data-Race-Free Execution Models
Daniel Poetzl, Daniel Kroening
TACAS1
2015 GPU Concurrency: Weak Behaviours and Programming Assumptions
abstract
Concurrency is pervasive and perplexing, particularly on graphics processing units (GPUs). Current specifications of languages and hardware are inconclusive; thus programmers often rely on folklore assumptions when writing software.
Jade Alglave, Mark Batty, Alastair F. Donaldson, Ganesh Gopalakrishnan, Jeroen Ketema, Daniel Poetzl, Tyler Sorensen 0001, John Wickerson
ASPLOS6
2014 Don't Sit on the Fence - A Static Analysis Approach to Automatic Fence Insertion
Jade Alglave, Daniel Kroening, Vincent Nimal, Daniel Poetzl
CAV4