Michael Schaper

dblp:90/11267 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-4795-0615ORCID · corroborated

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
3 papers
Program analysis · 91% Compilers and program optimization · 7% Programming languages and type systems · 2%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Computational complexity · 50% Logic in computer science · 50%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program analysis › static analysis
probabilistic program analysis
1.122023
Automated Expected Value Analysis of Recursive Programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2023
A modular cost analysis for probabilistic programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020
Program analysis
resource analysis
1.122023
Automated Expected Value Analysis of Recursive Programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2023
A modular cost analysis for probabilistic programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020
Program analysis
static analysis
1.122023
Automated Expected Value Analysis of Recursive Programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2023
A modular cost analysis for probabilistic programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020
Program analysis › static analysis
constraint-based analysis
0.412020
A modular cost analysis for probabilistic programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020
Program analysis › cost analysis
expected cost analysis
0.412020
A modular cost analysis for probabilistic programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020
Compilers and program optimization › intermediate representation › bytecode
bytecode compilation
0.312018
From Jinja bytecode to term rewriting: A complexity reflecting transformation · Inf. Comput. 2018
Computational complexity › complexity measures
program complexity
0.312018
From Jinja bytecode to term rewriting: A complexity reflecting transformation · Inf. Comput. 2018
Logic in computer science
term rewriting
0.312018
From Jinja bytecode to term rewriting: A complexity reflecting transformation · Inf. Comput. 2018
Programming languages and type systems › language semantics › formal semantics
operational semantics
0.112018
From Jinja bytecode to term rewriting: A complexity reflecting transformation · Inf. Comput. 2018

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

hoare logic · 0.7first-order constraint solving · 0.7constraint solving · 0.4SMT solving · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Automated Expected Value Analysis of Recursive Programs
abstract
In this work, we study the fully automated inference of expected result values of probabilistic programs in the presence of natural programming constructs such as procedures, local variables and recursion. While crucial, capturing these constructs becomes highly non-trivial. The key contribution is the definition of a term representation, denoted as infer[.], translating a pre-expectation semantics into first-order constraints, susceptible to automation via standard methods. A crucial step is the use of logical variables, inspired by previous work on Hoare logics for recursive programs. Noteworthy, our methodology is not restricted to tail-recursion, which could unarguably be replaced by iteration and wouldn't need additional insights. We have implemented this analysis in our prototype ev-imp. We provide ample experimental evidence of the prototype's algorithmic expressibility.
Martin Avanzini, Georg Moser, Michael Schaper
Proc. ACM Program. Lang.3
2020 A modular cost analysis for probabilistic programs
abstract
We present a novel methodology for the automated resource analysis of non-deterministic, probabilistic imperative programs, which gives rise to a modular approach . Program fragments are analysed in full independence. Moreover, the established results allow us to incorporate sampling from dynamic distributions , making our analysis applicable to a wider class of examples, for example the Coupon Collector’s problem . We have implemented our contributions in the tool , exploiting a constraint-solver over iterative refineable cost functions facilitated by off-the-shelf SMT solvers. We provide ample experimental evidence of the prototype’s algorithmic power. Our experiments show that our tool runs typically at least one order of magnitude faster than comparable tools. On more involved examples, it may even be the case that execution times of seconds become milliseconds. At the same time we retain the precision of existing tools. The extensions in applicability and the greater efficiency of our prototype, yield scalability of sorts. This effects into a wider class of examples, whose expected cost analysis can be thus be performed fully automatically.
Martin Avanzini, Georg Moser, Michael Schaper
Proc. ACM Program. Lang.3
2018 From Jinja bytecode to term rewriting: A complexity reflecting transformation
Georg Moser, Michael Schaper
Inf. Comput.2
2016 TcT: Tyrolean Complexity Tool
Martin Avanzini, Georg Moser, Michael Schaper
TACAS3