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.

Bertram Fronhöfer

dblp:30/1567 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2006
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 2 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 1 first-authorTheory of computation · 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
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Programming languages and type systems · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Programming languages and type systems
logic programming
0.011987
PLANLOG: A Language Framework for the Integration of Procedural and Logical Programming · IJCAI 1987
Automated reasoning and model checking › automated theorem proving
connection method
0.011983
Towards an Advanced Implementation of the Connection Method · IJCAI 1983
Automated reasoning and model checking
theorem proving
0.011983
Towards an Advanced Implementation of the Connection Method · IJCAI 1983

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

connection method · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2006 Hypothesis finding with proof theoretical appropriateness criteria
Bertram Fronhöfer, Akihiro Yamamoto
Theor. Comput. Sci.1
2003 Probabilistic Aspects of Score Systems
abstract
Due to their simple applicability score systems are in widespread use as a tool for decision making. Unfortunately, as we all feel, they are somehow not apt to take into account interdependencies among the values which are input to them when trying to decide an actual application case; a drawback which is overcome by the more powerful probabilistic systems. In order to analyze which assumptions are inherent in score systems, we translate them as faithfully as possible into probabilistic systems thus making available the technical machinery of the latter for this analysis task. Such a translation (as also given in1) reveals indeed some properties of score systems, but leads to an exponential number of probabilistic rules, which rules it out for practical use. For this reason we also developed further translations into probabilistic systems, which keep the simplicity of a score system (i.e. they use the same amount of rules as the score system). Moreover, the resulting probabilistic systems show their structure more explicitly than score systems, and they are also open to the addition of further knowledge.
Manfred Schramm, Bertram Fronhöfer
Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst.2
2002 Minimised Residue Hypotheses in Relevant Logic
Bertram Fronhöfer, Akihiro Yamamoto
ALT1
2000 Hypotheses Finding via Residue Hypotheses with the Resolution Principle
Akihiro Yamamoto, Bertram Fronhöfer
ALT2
1987 PLANLOG: A Language Framework for the Integration of Procedural and Logical Programming
Bertram Fronhöfer
IJCAI1
1983 Towards an Advanced Implementation of the Connection Method
Wolfgang Bibel, Elmar Eder, Bertram Fronhöfer
IJCAI3