EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
C. Norris Ip
dblp:47/2168
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
7as first author
0since 2021 · last 2005
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 5 · 4 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 4 · 3 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 4 · 2 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
2 papers |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Distributed systems · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers |
Program verification · 100% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › symbolic model checking
SAT-based model checking |
0.1 | 1 | 2005 | Symmetry Reduction in SAT-Based Model Checking · CAV 2005 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › state space reduction
symmetry reduction |
0.1 | 1 | 2005 | Symmetry Reduction in SAT-Based Model Checking · CAV 2005 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking
state space reduction |
0.0 | 2 | 2005 | Symmetry Reduction in SAT-Based Model Checking · CAV 2005 State Reduction Using Reversible Rules · DAC 1996 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
model checking |
0.0 | 2 | 2005 | Symmetry Reduction in SAT-Based Model Checking · CAV 2005 State Reduction Using Reversible Rules · DAC 1996 |
Program verification
model checking |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | Verifying Systems with Replicated Components in Murphi · CAV 1996 |
Distributed systems
fault tolerance |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | Verifying Systems with Replicated Components in Murphi · CAV 1996 |
Distributed systems › replication
replicated system |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | Verifying Systems with Replicated Components in Murphi · CAV 1996 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › temporal logic model checking
CTL model checking |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | State Reduction Using Reversible Rules · DAC 1996 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
symmetry reduction · 0.1SAT solving · 0.1state graph abstraction · 0.0murphi · 0.0model checking · 0.0BDD · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | Symmetry Reduction in SAT-Based Model Checking
Daijue Tang, Sharad Malik, Aarti Gupta, C. Norris Ip |
CAV | 4 |
| 2003 | Qualifying Precision of Abstract SystemC Models Using the SystemC Verification StandardabstractThe increasing complexity of Systems on Chip (SoC) has introduced the need for abstract executable specifications (models) covering both hardware and embedded software. The new capabilities of SystemC 2.0, such as those added for transaction-based communication and test-bench Specification and monitoring, facilitate this SoC modeling. However, an obstacle to the adoption of abstract modeling as standard design practice is the lack of well establishes methodologies for the assessment of model precision. We describe such a methodology based on the SystemC Verification Standard implemented by Cadence's TestBuilder-SC. This methodology enables comparison of high-level (transaction level) SoC models in SystemC against implementation RTL models. An application of the methodology is presented, based on the AMBA Class Library (ACL) for SystemC being developed by ARM in collaboration with EDA partners. The key elements of the methodology are: 1. A completely reusable testbench that can be used for simulation and verification of the design at both high-level (transaction level) of abstraction and RTL implementation level. 2. A single database format is used so that data collected from simulations at each level can easily be processed and compared. We present an example of effective validation of ARM PrimeXsys-platform IP components against their RTL implementation. Franco Carbognani, Christopher K. Lennard, C. Norris Ip, Allan Cochrane, Paul Bates |
DATE | 3 |
| 2000 | Simulation Coverage Enhancement Using Test Stimulus TransformationsabstractThis paper introduces the concept of abstract state exploration histories to a simulation environment, and presents a test stimulus transformation (TST) technique to improve simulation coverage. State exploration histories are adapted from reachability analysis in Formal Verification. In TST, an aggressively abstracted state exploration history is maintained during simulation. While this history is being collected, test stimuli from an existing test bench are transformed on-the-fly to explore new scenarios that are not in the history. The results showed that 3-fold increase in transition coverage for a cache coherence controller, and 10 times faster coverage convergence for a MPEG2 decoder can be achieved. C. Norris Ip |
ICCAD | 1 |
| 1999 | Verifying Systems with Replicated Components in Mur[b.phiv]
C. Norris Ip, David L. Dill |
Formal Methods Syst. Des. | 1 |
| 1998 | Generalized Reversible Rules
C. Norris Ip |
FMCAD | 1 |
| 1996 | Verifying Systems with Replicated Components in Murphi
C. Norris Ip, David L. Dill |
CAV | 1 |
| 1996 | State Reduction Using Reversible RulesabstractWe reduce the state explosion problem in automatic verification of finite-state systems by automatically collapsing subgraphs of the state graph into abstract states. The key idea of the method is to identify state generation rules that can be inverted. It can be used for verification of deadlock-freedom, error and invariant checking and stuttering-invariant CTL model checking. 1 Introduction Formal verification methods that rely on state enumeration are very effective in catching errors in designs. However, such methods suffer from the state explosion problem: the vast number of possibilities cannot be explored within available time and memory. The number of possibilities usually grows exponentially with number of components in the system. Although many techniques (e.g. BDDs [1, 3]) have been developed to tackle the state explosion problem, a lot of practical designs are still too complicated for automatic verification, especially for high level systems or protocols [8]. In this exp... C. Norris Ip, David L. Dill |
DAC | 1 |
| 1996 | Better Verification Through Symmetry
C. Norris Ip, David L. Dill |
Formal Methods Syst. Des. | 1 |
| 1993 | Efficient Verification of Symmetric Concurrent SystemsabstractPreviously (Proc. 11th Symp. on Computer Hardware Description Languages and their Application, April 1993), we proposed a reduction technique based on symmetries to alleviate the state explosion problem in automatic verification of concurrent systems. This paper describes the results of testing the technique on a wide range of algorithms and protocols, including realistic multiprocessor synchronization algorithms and cache coherence protocols. Memory requirements were reduced by amounts ranging from 83% to over 99%, and time requirements were often reduced as well. We also consider the effectiveness of the technique on different types of symmetries, such as symmetries in identical system components and symmetries in data values.> C. Norris Ip, David L. Dill |
ICCD | 1 |