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

Haim Kermany

dblp:57/5283 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1

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
1 paper
Electronic design automation · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Runtime systems and virtual machines · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test › coverage-driven verification
coverage closure
0.412020
Late Breaking Results: FRIENDS - Finding Related Interesting Events via Neighbor Detection · DAC 2020
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
formal verification
0.412020
Late Breaking Results: FRIENDS - Finding Related Interesting Events via Neighbor Detection · DAC 2020
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
hardware verification
0.412020
Late Breaking Results: FRIENDS - Finding Related Interesting Events via Neighbor Detection · DAC 2020
Runtime systems and virtual machines
garbage collection
0.112006
The Compressor: concurrent, incremental, and parallel compaction · PLDI 2006

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

formal verification · 0.4coverage directed generation · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 TackleTest: A Tool for Amplifying Test Generation via Type-Based Combinatorial Coverage
abstract
We present TackleTest, an open-source tool for automatic generation of unit-level test cases for Java applications. TackleTest builds on top of two well-known test-generation tools, EvoSuite and Randoop, by adding a new combinatorial-testing-based approach for computing coverage goals that comprehensively exercises different parameter type combinations of the methods under test, at configurable interaction levels. We describe the tool architecture, the main tool components, and the combinatorial type-based testing technique. TackleTest was developed in the context of application modernization at IBM, but it is also applicable as a general-purpose test-generation tool. We have evaluated TackleTest on several IBM-internal enterprise applications as well as on a subset of the SF110 benchmark, and share our findings and lessons learned. Overall, TackleTest implements a new and complementary way of computing coverage goals for unit testing via a novel white-box application of combinatorial testing.
Rachel Tzoref, Saurabh Sinha 0003, Antonio Abu Nassar, Victoria Goldin, Haim Kermany
ICST5
2020 Late Breaking Results: FRIENDS - Finding Related Interesting Events via Neighbor Detection
abstract
We present Finding Related Interesting Events via Neighbor Detection (FRIENDS), a novel approach to assist verification teams with coverage closure. FRIENDS uses formal verification to find the neighboring events of a never-hit, or hard-to-hit, coverage event. The neighbor events of a given target event are defined as those events for which a test hitting them has higher probability of hitting the target event than a test not hitting them. Assuming that some of the neighboring events are easier to hit than the target event itself, this information can be used by the team or by a Coverage Directed Generation (CDG) tool during the coverage closure process.
Raviv Gal, Haim Kermany, Alexander Ivrii, Ziv Nevo, Avi Ziv
DAC2
2006 The Compressor: concurrent, incremental, and parallel compaction
abstract
The widely used Mark-and-Sweep garbage collector has a drawback in that it does not move objects during collection. As a result, large long-running realistic applications, such as Web application servers, frequently face the fragmentation problem. To eliminate fragmentation, a heap compaction is run periodically. However, compaction typically imposes very long undesirable pauses in the application. While efficient concurrent collectors are ubiquitous in production runtime systems (such as JVMs), an efficient non-intrusive compactor is still missing.In this paper we present the Compressor, a novel compaction algorithm that is concurrent, parallel, and incremental. The Compressor compacts the entire heap to a single condensed area, while preserving the objects' order, but reduces pause times significantly, thereby allowing acceptable runs on large heaps. Furthermore, the Compressor is the first compactor that requires only a single heap pass. As such, it is the most efficient compactors known today, even when run in a parallel Stop-the-World manner (i.e., when the program threads are halted). Thus, to the best of our knowledge, the Compressor is the most efficient compactor known today. The Compressor was implemented on a Jikes Research RVM and we provide measurements demonstrating its qualities.
Haim Kermany, Erez Petrank
PLDI1