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

Tom Zamir

dblp:149/1350 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 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
1 paper
Software testing · 100%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing
test planning
0.212014
Using Model-Based Diagnosis to Improve Software Testing · AAAI 2014
Automated reasoning and model checking › diagnosis
model-based diagnosis
0.212014
Using Model-Based Diagnosis to Improve Software Testing · AAAI 2014

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

model-based diagnosis · 0.6MDP-based planning · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2014 Using Model-Based Diagnosis to Improve Software Testing
abstract
We propose a combination of AI techniques to improve softwaretesting. When a test fails, a model-based diagnosis(MBD) algorithm is used to propose a set of possible explanations.We call these explanations diagnoses. Then, a planningalgorithm is used to suggest further tests to identify thecorrect diagnosis. A tester preforms these tests and reportstheir outcome back to the MBD algorithm, which uses thisinformation to prune incorrect diagnoses. This iterative processcontinues until the correct diagnosis is returned. We callthis testing paradigm Test, Diagnose and Plan (TDP). Severaltest planning algorithms are proposed to minimize the numberof TDP iterations, and consequently the number of testsrequired until the correct diagnosis is found. Experimentalresults show the benefits of using an MDP-based planning algorithmsover greedy test planning in three benchmarks.
Tom Zamir, Roni Stern, Meir Kalech
AAAI1