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

Jan Huus

dblp:177/9448 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1993
—ORCID · none

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

Computer networks · 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.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Automata and formal languages · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Program verification · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification › model checking › state space exploration
reachability analysis
0.011993
Language-based analysis of communicating finite state machines · ICNP 1993
Automata and formal languages › infinite-state systems › channel systems
communicating finite state machines
0.011993
Language-based analysis of communicating finite state machines · ICNP 1993
Automata and formal languages
protocol specification
0.011993
Language-based analysis of communicating finite state machines · ICNP 1993

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

parallel reachability analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1993 Language-based analysis of communicating finite state machines
abstract
The authors present an efficient method for extracting a behavior description of a process (communicating finite state machine), as constrained by a given protocol. In the case where the constrained behavior corresponds to the unconstrained behavior depicted by the process specification, the process is said to be effective. The authors call the derived behavior description a process event graph (PEG). By comparing the PEG with the process specification, they determine whether a process in a protocol is effective. Two extensions to the basic algorithm are given, one to introduce parallelism to reachability analysis and one to detect traces that lead to process blockage. The authors focus initially on the two-process case, and then consider implications of more general protocols.>
Jan Huus, Hasan Ural
ICNP1