EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ilan Beer
dblp:61/594
· DBLP profile ↗
13ranked-venue papers
9as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 11 · 8 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 9 · 6 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 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.
| Theoretical computer science
8 papers |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 78% Logic in computer science · 22% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers |
Electronic design automation · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Software testing · 100% |
Topics — the 13 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Automated reasoning and model checking
causality-based explanation |
0.1 | 1 | 2009 | Explaining Counterexamples Using Causality · CAV 2009 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking
counterexample explanation |
0.1 | 1 | 2009 | Explaining Counterexamples Using Causality · CAV 2009 |
Logic in computer science
temporal logic |
0.1 | 3 | 2001 | The Temporal Logic Sugar · CAV 2001 On-the-Fly Model Checking of RCTL Formulas · CAV 1998 Efficient Detection of Vacuity in ACTL Formulaas · CAV 1997 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
model checking |
0.1 | 4 | 1998 | On-the-Fly Model Checking of RCTL Formulas · CAV 1998 Efficient Detection of Vacuity in ACTL Formulaas · CAV 1997 RuleBase: Model Checking at IBM · CAV 1997 |
Logic in computer science › formal specification
specification language |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | The Temporal Logic Sugar · CAV 2001 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking
symbolic model checking |
0.0 | 2 | 1997 | RuleBase: Model Checking at IBM · CAV 1997 Efficient Model Checking by Automated Ordering of Transition Relation Partitions · CAV 1994 |
Software testing › test oracle
test oracle generation |
0.0 | 1 | 2000 | FoCs: Automatic Generation of Simulation Checkers from Formal Specifications · CAV 2000 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
runtime verification |
0.0 | 1 | 2000 | FoCs: Automatic Generation of Simulation Checkers from Formal Specifications · CAV 2000 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › explicit-state model checking
on-the-fly model checking |
0.0 | 1 | 1998 | On-the-Fly Model Checking of RCTL Formulas · CAV 1998 |
Electronic design automation
hardware verification and test |
0.0 | 2 | 1996 | RuleBase: An Industry-Oriented Formal Verification Tool · DAC 1996 Methodology and System for Practical Formal Verification of Reactive Hardware · CAV 1994 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › temporal logic model checking
vacuity detection |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Efficient Detection of Vacuity in ACTL Formulaas · CAV 1997 |
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
formal verification |
0.0 | 1 | 1996 | RuleBase: An Industry-Oriented Formal Verification Tool · DAC 1996 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking
state space reduction |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | Efficient Model Checking by Automated Ordering of Transition Relation Partitions · CAV 1994 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
causality analysis · 0.1formal specification · 0.1theorem proving · 0.0transition relation partitioning · 0.0automated ordering · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | Facilitating timing debug by logic path correspondenceabstractSynthesis tools for high-performance VLSI designs employ aggressive logic optimization techniques in order to meet physical requirements such as area and cycle time. During these optimizations, the original structure of the design, which is usually written in a hardware description language (HDL), is lost. It is difficult, and often impossible, to relate signals after synthesis to the original signals in the HDL code. Some signals only lose their names while for others there are no equivalent counterparts in the design after synthesis. Debugging timing problems is based on timing reports which are usually represented in terms of the post-synthesis design. Hence, it is difficult to relate critical paths in the timing reports to the relevant paths in the HDL code when a logic fix is needed. In this paper, we propose a different approach for dealing with the correspondence problem: instead of trying to relate signals we relate paths. Given a critical path in a post-synthesis representation, our method is able to find all corresponding paths in the pre-synthesis (HDL) representation. As a result, locating the parts in the HDL which are relevant to the given timing problem becomes trivial. A novel Sat-based algorithm for dealing with the path-correspondence problem is described. Experimental results on various industrial high-end processor designs show the effectiveness of our algorithm in substantially reducing the amount of paths in the HDL which one will have to consider when debugging a given critical path. Oshri Adler, Eli Arbel, Ilia Averbouch, Ilan Beer, Inna Grijnevitch |
DATE | 4 |
| 2012 | Explaining counterexamples using causality
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Hana Chockler, Avigail Orni, Richard J. Trefler |
Formal Methods Syst. Des. | 1 |
| 2009 | Explaining Counterexamples Using Causality
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Hana Chockler, Avigail Orni, Richard J. Trefler |
CAV | 1 |
| 2001 | The Temporal Logic Sugar
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Cindy Eisner, Dana Fisman, Anna Gringauze, Yoav Rodeh |
CAV | 1 |
| 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. | 3 |
| 2001 | Efficient Detection of Vacuity in Temporal Model Checking
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Cindy Eisner, Yoav Rodeh |
Formal Methods Syst. Des. | 1 |
| 2000 | FoCs: Automatic Generation of Simulation Checkers from Formal Specifications
Yael Abarbanel, Ilan Beer, Leonid Gluhovsky, Sharon Barner, Yaron Wolfsthal |
CAV | 2 |
| 1998 | On-the-Fly Model Checking of RCTL Formulas
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Avner Landver |
CAV | 1 |
| 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 |
CAV | 1 |
| 1997 | Efficient Detection of Vacuity in ACTL Formulaas
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Cindy Eisner, Yoav Rodeh |
CAV | 1 |
| 1996 | RuleBase: An Industry-Oriented Formal Verification ToolabstractRuleBase is a formal verification tool, developed by the IBM Haifa Research Laboratory. It is the result of three years of experience in practical formal verification of hardware which, we believe, has been a key factor in bringing the tool to its current level of maturity. We present the tool, including several unique features, and summarize our usage experience. Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Cindy Eisner, Avner Landver |
DAC | 1 |
| 1994 | Methodology and System for Practical Formal Verification of Reactive Hardware
Ilan Beer, Shoham Ben-David, Daniel Geist, Raanan Gewirtzman, Michael Yoeli |
CAV | 1 |
| 1994 | Efficient Model Checking by Automated Ordering of Transition Relation Partitions
Daniel Geist, Ilan Beer |
CAV | 2 |