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.

Donald I. Good

dblp:55/332 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 1979
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1Applied, 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
3 papers
Program verification · 92% Programming languages and type systems · 8%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Mathematical optimization · 100%

Topics — the 8 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification
concurrent program verification
0.011979
Principles of Proving Programs Correct in Gypsy · POPL 1979
Program verification
deductive verification
0.011979
Principles of Proving Programs Correct in Gypsy · POPL 1979
Program verification › invariant generation
inductive assertions
0.011975
An Interactive Program Verification System · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1975
Program verification › mechanized verification
interactive verification
0.011975
An Interactive Program Verification System · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1975
Programming languages and type systems
language design
0.011979
Principles of Proving Programs Correct in Gypsy · POPL 1979
Mathematical optimization › numerical analysis
interval arithmetic
0.011970
Computer Interval Arithmetic: Definition and Proof of Correct Implementation · J. ACM 1970
Mathematical optimization
numerical computation
0.011970
Computer Interval Arithmetic: Definition and Proof of Correct Implementation · J. ACM 1970
Program verification › deductive verification
verification condition generation
0.011975
An Interactive Program Verification System · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1975

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

theorem proving · 0.0proof methods · 0.0inductive assertion method · 0.0formal specification · 0.0automated verification · 0.0floating-point arithmetic · 0.0ALGOL · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1979 Principles of Proving Programs Correct in Gypsy
abstract
Concurrency in Gypsy is based on a unique, formal approach to specifying and proving systems of concurrent processes. The specification and proof methods are designed so that proofs of individual processes are totally independent, even when operating concurrently. These methods can be applied both to terminating and non-terminating processes, and the proof methods are well suited to automated verification aids. The basic principles of these methods and their interaction with the design of Gypsy are described.
Donald I. Good, Richard M. Cohen, James G. Keeton-Williams
POPL1
1975 An Interactive Program Verification System
abstract
This paper is an initial progress report on the development of an interactive system for verifying that computer programs meet given formal specifications. The system is based on the conventional inductive assertion method: given a program and its specifications, the object is to generate the verification conditions, simplify them, and prove what remains. The important feature of the system is that the human user has the opportunity and obligation to help actively in the simplifying and proving. A general description is given of the overall design philosophy, structure, and functional components of the system, and a simple sorting program is used to illustrate both the behavior of major system components and the type of user interaction the system provides.
Donald I. Good, Ralph L. London, W. W. Bledsoe
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.1
1973 New directions in teaching the fundamentals of computer science - discrete structures and computational analysis
abstract
Since the publication of the Curriculum 68 report of the ACM Committee [CUR 68], undergraduate computer science programs have undergone substantial changes. Notably, many courses previously taught at the graduate level have shifted down to the undergraduate level; new areas have developed and consolidated but were not covered by the ACM report. These facts make it necessary to revise and update the Curriculum 68 report. An important factor which could help the revision is the actual experience gained through the development of many new undergraduate computer science programs since the publication of Curriculum 68 report five years ago. More specifically, most recommendations of the ACM report contain just the subject areas to be taught. The actual teaching experiences of these courses have formulated certain basic philosophies and formats of presentation. It is helpful, in our opinion, to compare the merits of these philosophies and formats of presentation.
Raymond T. Yeh, Donald I. Good, David R. Musser
SIGCSE2
1970 Computer Interval Arithmetic: Definition and Proof of Correct Implementation
abstract
A definition is given of computer interval arithmetic suitable for implementation on a digital computer. Some computational properties and simplifications are derived. An ALGOL code segment is proved to be a correct implementation of the definition on a specified machine environment.
Donald I. Good, Ralph L. London
J. ACM1