EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Carlos Sáenz-Adán
dblp:166/2401
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0003-2485-3182ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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 |
Requirements engineering and software design · 61% Program analysis · 30% Compilers and program optimization · 9% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Requirements engineering and software design
model-driven engineering |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022 |
Program analysis
provenance capture |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022 |
Requirements engineering and software design › model-driven engineering
UML-based design |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022 |
Compilers and program optimization
program instrumentation |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and Experience · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
pattern mapping · 0.6model-driven development · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Integrating Provenance Capture and UML With UML2PROV: Principles and ExperienceabstractIn response to the increasing calls for algorithmic accountability, UML2PROV is a novel approach to address the existing gap between application design, where models are described by UML diagrams, and provenance design, where generated provenance is meant to describe an application's flows of data, processes and responsibility, enabling greater accountability of this application. The originality of UML2PROV is that designers are allowed to follow their preferred software engineering methodology to create the UML Diagrams for their application, while UML2PROV takes the UML diagrams as a starting point to automatically generate: (1) the design of the provenance to be generated (expressed asPROV templates); and (2) the software library for collecting runtime values of interest (encoded as variable-value associations known asbindings), which can be deployed in the application without developer intervention. At runtime, the PROV templates combined with the bindings are used to generate high-quality provenance suitable for subsequent consumption. UML2PROV is rigorously defined by an extensive set of 17 patterns mapping UML diagrams to provenance templates, and is accompanied by a reference implementation based on Model Driven Development techniques. A systematic evaluation of UML2PROV uses quantitative data and qualitative arguments to show the benefits and trade-offs of applying UML2PROV for software engineers seeking to make applications provenance-aware. In particular, as the UML design drives both the design and capture of provenance, we discuss how the levels of detail in UML designs affect aspects such as provenance design generation, application instrumentation, provenance capability maintenance, storage and run-time overhead, and quality of the generated provenance. Some key lessons are learned such as: starting from a non-tailored UML design leads to the capture of more provenance than required to satisfy provenance requirements and therefore, increases the overhead unnecessarily; alternatively, if the UML design is tailored to focus on addressing provenance requirements, only relevant provenance gets to be collected, resulting in lower overheads. Carlos Sáenz-Adán, Beatriz Pérez 0001, Francisco J. García Izquierdo, Luc Moreau 0001 |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 1 |
| 2018 | UML2PROV: Automating Provenance Capture in Software Engineering
Carlos Sáenz-Adán, Beatriz Pérez 0001, Trung Dong Huynh, Luc Moreau 0001 |
SOFSEM | 1 |
| 2018 | A systematic review of provenance systems
Beatriz Pérez 0001, Julio Rubio 0001, Carlos Sáenz-Adán |
Knowl. Inf. Syst. | 3 |