EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Noah Oldfield
dblp:324/0520
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-9059-0694ORCID · 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 2021
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 |
Quantum computing and quantum information · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing
quantum program testing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Faster and Better Quantum Software Testing through Specification Reduction and Projective Measurements · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2025 |
Quantum computing and quantum information › quantum programming
quantum programs |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Faster and Better Quantum Software Testing through Specification Reduction and Projective Measurements · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
reduction algorithm · 1.7projective measurements · 1.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Faster and Better Quantum Software Testing through Specification Reduction and Projective MeasurementsabstractQuantum computing (QC) promises polynomial and exponential speedups in many domains, such as unstructured search and prime number factoring. However, quantum programs yield probabilistic outputs from exponentially growing distributions and are vulnerable to quantum-specific faults. Existing quantum software testing (QST) approaches treat quantum superpositions as classical distributions. This leads to two major limitations when applied to quantum programs: (1) an exponentially growing sample space distribution and (2) failing to detect quantum-specific faults such as phase flips. To overcome these limitations, we introduce a QST approach, which applies a reduction algorithm to a quantum program specification. The reduced specification alleviates the limitations (1) by enabling faster sampling through quantum parallelism and (2) by performing projective measurements in the mixed Hadamard basis. Our evaluation of 143 quantum programs across four categories demonstrates significant improvements in test runtimes and fault detection with our reduction approach. Average test runtimes improved from 169.9 s to 11.8 s, with notable enhancements in programs with large circuit depths (383.1 s to 33.4 s) and large program specifications (464.8 s to 7.7 s). Furthermore, our approach increases mutation scores from \(54.5\%\) to \(74.7\%\) , effectively detecting phase flip faults that non-reduced specifications miss. These results underline our approach's importance to improve QST efficiency and effectiveness. Noah Oldfield, Christoph Laaber, Tao Yue 0002, Shaukat Ali 0001 |
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. | 1 |