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

Samual Bates

dblp:63/817 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1993
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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
1 paper
Software testing · 50% Compilers and program optimization · 25% Program analysis · 25%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Compilers and program optimization › dependence analysis
program dependence graph
0.011993
Incremental Program Testing Using Program Dependence Graphs · POPL 1993
Program analysis › static analysis
program slicing
0.011993
Incremental Program Testing Using Program Dependence Graphs · POPL 1993
Software testing
regression testing
0.011993
Incremental Program Testing Using Program Dependence Graphs · POPL 1993
Software testing
test adequacy
0.011993
Incremental Program Testing Using Program Dependence Graphs · POPL 1993

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

program slicing · 0.0program dependence graph · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1993 Incremental Program Testing Using Program Dependence Graphs
abstract
Program dependence graphs have been proposed for use in optimizing, vectorizing, and parallelizing compilers, and for program integration. This paper proposes their use as the basis for incremental program testing when using test data adequacy criteria. Test data adequacy is commonly used to provide some confidence that a particular test suite does a reasonable job of testing a program. Incremental program testing using test data adequacy criteria addresses the problem of testing a modified program given an adequate test suite for the original program. Ideally, one would like to create an adequate test suite for the modified program that reuses as many files from the old test suite as possible. Furthermore, one would like to know, for every file that is in both the old and the new test suites, whether the program components exercised by that file have been affected by the program modification; if no components have been affected, then it is not necessary to rerun the program using that file.In this paper we define adequacy criteria based on the program dependence graph, and propose techniques based on program slicing to identify components of the modified program that can be tested using files from the old test suite, and components that have been affected by the modification. This information can be used to reduce the time required to create new test files, and to avoid unproductive retesting of unaffected components. Although exact identification of the components listed above is, in general, undecidable, we demonstrate that our techniques provide safe approximations.
Samual Bates, Susan Horwitz
POPL1