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
Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert

Anton Babenko

dblp:82/7492 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2009
—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
Debugging and program repair · 38% Software maintenance and evolution · 38% Program analysis · 23%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software maintenance and evolution › log analysis
anomaly detection		 0.112009
AVA: automated interpretation of dynamically detected anomalies · ISSTA 2009
Debugging and program repair
fault localization		 0.112009
AVA: automated interpretation of dynamically detected anomalies · ISSTA 2009
Program analysis › specification mining
behavioral model inference		 0.012009
AVA: automated interpretation of dynamically detected anomalies · ISSTA 2009
Program analysis
dynamic analysis		 0.012009
AVA: automated interpretation of dynamically detected anomalies · ISSTA 2009

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

dynamic analysis · 0.1anomaly detection · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2009 AVA: automated interpretation of dynamically detected anomalies
abstract
Dynamic analysis techniques have been extensively adopted to discover causes of observed failures. In particular, anomaly detection techniques can infer behavioral models from observed legal executions and compare failing executions with the inferred models to automatically identify the likely anomalous events that caused observed failures.
Anton Babenko, Leonardo Mariani, Fabrizio Pastore
 ISSTA1