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

Daniel Geist

dblp:45/6037 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
18ranked-venue papers
5as first author
0since 2021 · last 2005
—ORCID · none

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

Theory of computation · 10 · 2 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 6 · 1 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 6 · 2 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-authorApplied, 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.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
5 papers
Electronic design automation · 90% Parallel and multicore computing · 8% Processor architecture and microarchitecture · 2%
Theoretical computer science
4 papers
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100%

Topics — the 17 heaviest of 17, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking
symbolic model checking
0.132002
Symbolic Localization Reduction with Reconstruction Layering and Backtracking · CAV 2002
RuleBase: Model Checking at IBM · CAV 1997
Efficient Model Checking by Automated Ordering of Transition Relation Partitions · CAV 1994
Electronic design automation
hardware verification and test
0.132001
Semi-Formal Test Generation with Genevieve · DAC 2001
A Study in Coverage-Driven Test Generation · DAC 1999
Methodology and System for Practical Formal Verification of Reactive Hardware · CAV 1994
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
hardware verification
0.122000
Achieving Scalability in Parallel Reachability Analysis of Very Large Circuits · CAV 2000
A Methodology for the Verification of a "System on Chip" · DAC 1999
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
test generation
0.012001
Semi-Formal Test Generation with Genevieve · DAC 2001
Automated reasoning and model checking
model checking
0.021997
RuleBase: Model Checking at IBM · CAV 1997
Efficient Model Checking by Automated Ordering of Transition Relation Partitions · CAV 1994
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel computing › parallel program analysis
parallel verification
0.012000
Achieving Scalability in Parallel Reachability Analysis of Very Large Circuits · CAV 2000
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test › formal verification
reachability analysis
0.012000
Achieving Scalability in Parallel Reachability Analysis of Very Large Circuits · CAV 2000
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test › coverage-driven verification
coverage-directed test generation
0.011999
A Study in Coverage-Driven Test Generation · DAC 1999
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
formal verification
0.011999
A Study in Coverage-Driven Test Generation · DAC 1999
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
functional verification
0.011999
A Study in Coverage-Driven Test Generation · DAC 1999
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test › hardware verification
hybrid verification
0.011999
A Study in Coverage-Driven Test Generation · DAC 1999
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test › hardware verification
system-on-chip verification
0.011999
A Methodology for the Verification of a "System on Chip" · DAC 1999
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test › hardware verification
verification methodology
0.011999
A Methodology for the Verification of a "System on Chip" · DAC 1999
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking
state space reduction
0.011994
Efficient Model Checking by Automated Ordering of Transition Relation Partitions · CAV 1994
Electronic design automation
model checking
0.012001
Semi-Formal Test Generation with Genevieve · DAC 2001
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test › functional verification
logic verification
0.012000
Achieving Scalability in Parallel Reachability Analysis of Very Large Circuits · CAV 2000
Processor architecture and microarchitecture
superscalar processor
0.011999
A Study in Coverage-Driven Test Generation · DAC 1999

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

reconstruction layering · 0.0backtracking · 0.0semi-formal techniques · 0.0counterexample generation · 0.0parallelization · 0.0theorem proving · 0.0simulation · 0.0formal methods · 0.0transition relation partitioning · 0.0automated ordering · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2005 Computing the minimum DNF representation of Boolean functions defined by intervals
Baruch Schieber, Daniel Geist, Ayal Zaks
Discret. Appl. Math.2
2003 Semi-formal test generation and resolving a temporal abstraction problem in practice: industrial application
abstract
This document describes a successful application of a semi-formal test generation technique to the verification of Direct Memory Access Controller (DMAC) of ST50, a new general purpose RISC microprocessor developed by STMicroelectronics and Hitachi. Like other memory-related devices, the DMA controller challenges formal techniques because of the state explosion problem. To cope with the challenge, abstraction mechanism is applied during test generation: several abstract models are created in order to verify different functional aspects of the design. We also propose a practical solution to overcome a temporal abstraction problem that arises when tests issued from an abstract model have to be applied during real design simulation.
Julia Dushina, Mike Benjamin, Daniel Geist
ASP-DAC3
2003 Model Checking at IBM
Shoham Ben-David, Cindy Eisner, Daniel Geist, Yaron Wolfsthal
Formal Methods Syst. Des.3
2002 Symbolic Localization Reduction with Reconstruction Layering and Backtracking
Sharon Barner, Daniel Geist, Anna Gringauze
CAV2
2002 A Scalable Parallel Algorithm for Reachability Analysis of Very Large Circuits
Tamir Heyman, Daniel Geist, Orna Grumberg, Assaf Schuster
Formal Methods Syst. Des.2
2001 Semi-Formal Test Generation with Genevieve
abstract
This paper describes the first application of the Genevieve test generation methodology. The Genevieve approach uses semi-for-mal techniques derived from “model-checking” to generate test suites for specific behaviours of the design under test. An “interest-ing” behaviour is claimed to be unreachable. If a path from an ini-tial state to the state of interest does exist, a counter-example is generated. The sequence of states specifies a test for the desired behaviour.
Julia Dushina, Mike Benjamin, Daniel Geist
DAC3
2001 Semi-Formal Test Generation for a Block of Industrial DSP
abstract
Describes an industrial application of the Genevieve test generation methodology. The Genevieve approach uses formal techniques to generate test suites for specific design behaviour. The example, which is a part of the ST100 DSP, was chosen in order to highlight real life problems such as big data structures, complex control logic, and complex environments where it is difficult to determine how to drive the complete system to ensure a given behaviour in the unit under test.
Julia Dushina, Mike Benjamin, Daniel Geist
VTS3
2001 On the Effective Deployment of Functional Formal Verification
Yael Abarbanel-Vinov, Neta Aizenbud-Reshef, Ilan Beer, Cindy Eisner, Daniel Geist, Tamir Heyman, Iris Reuveni, Eran Rippel, Irit Shitsevalov, Yaron Wolfsthal, Tali Yatzkar-Haham
Formal Methods Syst. Des.5
2000 Achieving Scalability in Parallel Reachability Analysis of Very Large Circuits
Tamir Heyman, Daniel Geist, Orna Grumberg, Assaf Schuster
CAV2
1999 A Study in Coverage-Driven Test Generation
abstract
One possible solution to the verification crisis is to bridge the gap between formal verification and simulation by using hybrid techniques.This paper presents a study of such a functional verification methodology that uses coverage of formal models to specify tests.This was applied to a modern superscalar microprocessor and the resulting tests were compared to tests generated using existing methods.The results showed some 50% improvement in transition coverage with less than a third the number of test instructions, demonstrating that hybrid techniques can significantly improve functional verification.1.
Mike Benjamin, Daniel Geist, Alan Hartman, Gérard Mas, Ralph Smeets, Yaron Wolfsthal
DAC2
1999 A Methodology for the Verification of a "System on Chip"
abstract
This paper summarizes the verification effort of a complex ASIC designated to be an “all in one” ISDN network router. This ASIC is unique because it actually consists of many independent components, called “cores ” (including the processor). The integration of these components onto one chip results in an ISOC (Integrated System On a Chip). The complexity of verifying an ISOC is virtually impossible without a proper methodology. This paper presents the methodology developed for verifying the router. In particular, the verification method as well as the tools that were built to execute this method are presented. Finally, a summary of the verification results is given.
Daniel Geist, Giora Biran, Tamarah Arons, Michael Slavkin, Yvgeny Nustov, Monica Farkas, Karen Holtz, Andy Long, Steve Barret
DAC1
1997 RuleBase: Model Checking at IBM
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Cindy Eisner, Daniel Geist, Leonid Gluhovsky, Tamir Heyman, Avner Landver, P. Paanah, Yoav Rodeh, G. Ronin, Yaron Wolfsthal
CAV4
1996 Coverage-Directed Test Generation Using Symbolic Techniques
Daniel Geist, Monica Farkas, Avner Landver, Yossi Lichtenstein, Shmuel Ur, Yaron Wolfsthal
FMCAD1
1995 AVPGEN-A test generator for architecture verification
abstract
This paper describes a system (AVPGEN) for generating tests (called architecture verification programs or AVP's) to check the conformance of processor designs to the specified architecture. To generate effective tests, AVPGEN uses novel concepts like symbolic execution and constraint solving, along with various biasing techniques. Unlike many earlier systems that make biased random choices, AVPGEN often chooses intermediate or final values and then solves for initial values that can lead to the desired values. A language called SIGL (symbolic instruction graph language) is provided in AVPGEN for the user to specify templates with symbolic constraints. The combination of user-specified constraints and the biasing functions is used to focus the tests on conditions that are interesting in that they are likely to activate various kinds of bugs. The system has been used successfully to debug many S/390 processors and is an integral part of the design process for these processors.>
Ashok K. Chandra, Vijay S. Iyengar, D. Jameson, R. V. Jawalekar, Indira Nair, Barry K. Rosen, Michael P. Mullen, J. Yoon, R. Armoni, Daniel Geist, Yaron Wolfsthal
IEEE Trans. Very Large Scale Integr. Syst.10
1994 Methodology and System for Practical Formal Verification of Reactive Hardware
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Daniel Geist, Raanan Gewirtzman, Michael Yoeli
CAV3
1994 Efficient Model Checking by Automated Ordering of Transition Relation Partitions
Daniel Geist, Ilan Beer
CAV1
1989 Time-variant decision support systems
abstract
Intelligent decision systems in time-invariant situations must be able to manipulate time-variant data and functions. The authors present an algorithm for the following dynamic computational problem: given a set of continuous functions, keep track efficiently of their order in their domain. The algorithm has time complexity of O(nlog/sub 2/n+K min(log/sub 2/n, log/sub 2/K)), where n is the number of functions and K is the total number of intersections between the functions. The solution provides for a convenient object-oriented view of the time-variant priority queue. Contrary to the abstract data type consisting of the array (data structure) and the associated utilities (push, pop), the time-variant priority queue maintains a private state as the data change.>
Daniel Geist, Yuval Lirov
SMC1
1989 PC-based 3-D reconstruction of medical images
Daniel Geist, Michael W. Vannier
Comput. Graph.1