Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Steven Sparks
dblp:90/1771
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1988
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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
1 paper |
Software testing · 100% | |
| Computer networks
1 paper |
Internet architecture and protocols · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing › specification-based testing
conformance testing |
0.0 | 1 | 1988 | MAP 2.1 Conformance Testing Tools · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988 |
Software testing › specification-based testing › conformance testing
protocol conformance testing |
0.0 | 1 | 1988 | MAP 2.1 Conformance Testing Tools · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988 |
Internet architecture and protocols › protocol engineering
protocol testing |
0.0 | 1 | 1988 | MAP 2.1 Conformance Testing Tools · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
dynamic conformance testing · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1988 | MAP 2.1 Conformance Testing ToolsabstractThe major components of the MAP 2.1 conformance test system are described. Protocol conformance testing and program testing are compared. The scope and process of dynamic conformance testing is reviewed. The architecture of the tests system is presented, first in terms of the developing ISO (International Organization for Standardization) framework, and then in terms of run-time components. Several specific tools which comprise the test system are described. These tools include test engines, a high-level control tool, monitoring and analysis tools, and document handling tools. Benefits and limitations of the test tools are examined. Conclusions and suggestions for future efforts are provided.> Robert S. Matthews, K. H. Muralidhar, Steven Sparks |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 3 |