EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Steve Gregory
dblp:98/152
· DBLP profile ↗
16ranked-venue papers
4as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
0000-0003-2414-0115ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 8 · 1 first-authorTheory of computation · 7 · 1 first-authorArtificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 3Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 2 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 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 |
Programming languages and type systems · 100% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Parallel and multicore computing · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Programming languages and type systems
logic programming |
0.0 | 1 | 1986 | Parlog: Parallel Programming in Logic · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 1986 |
Programming languages and type systems › logic programming
parallel logic programming |
0.0 | 1 | 1986 | Parlog: Parallel Programming in Logic · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 1986 |
Parallel and multicore computing
parallel programming models |
0.0 | 1 | 1986 | Parlog: Parallel Programming in Logic · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 1986 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
committed choice nondeterminism · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Evaluation of Mutation Testing in a Nuclear Industry Case StudyabstractFor software quality assurance, many safety-critical industries appeal to the use of dynamic testing and structural coverage criteria. However, there are reasons to doubt the adequacy of such practices. Mutation testing has been suggested as an alternative or complementary approach but its cost has traditionally hindered its adoption by industry, and there are limited studies applying it to real safety-critical code. This paper evaluates the effectiveness of state-of-the-art mutation testing on safety-critical code from within the U.K. nuclear industry, in terms of revealing flaws in test suites that already meet the structural coverage criteria recommended by relevant safety standards. It also assesses the practical feasibility of implementing such mutation testing in a real setting. We applied a conventional selective mutation approach to a C codebase supplied by a nuclear industry partner and measured the mutation score achieved by the existing test suite. We repeated the experiment using trivial compiler equivalence (TCE) to assess the benefit that it might provide. Using a conventional approach, it first appeared that the existing test suite only killed 82% of the mutants, but applying TCE revealed that it killed 92%. The difference was due to equivalent or duplicate mutants that TCE eliminated. We then added new tests to kill all the surviving mutants, increasing the test suite size by 18% in the process. In conclusion, mutation testing can potentially improve fault detection compared to structural-coverage-guided testing, and may be affordable in a nuclear industry context. The industry feedback on our results was positive, although further evidence is needed from application of mutation testing to software with known real faults. Pedro Delgado-Pérez, Ibrahim Habli, Steve Gregory, Rob Alexander, John A. Clark, Inmaculada Medina-Bulo |
IEEE Trans. Reliab. | 3 |
| 2012 | Balanced Multi-Label Propagation for Overlapping Community Detection in Social Networks
Zhihao Wu 0001, Youfang Lin, Steve Gregory, Huaiyu Wan, Shengfeng Tian |
J. Comput. Sci. Technol. | 3 |
| 2008 | A Fast Algorithm to Find Overlapping Communities in Networks
Steve Gregory |
ECML/PKDD (1) | 1 |
| 2007 | A Prolog-Based Language for Workflow Programming
Steve Gregory, Martha Paschali |
COORDINATION | 1 |
| 2007 | An Algorithm to Find Overlapping Community Structure in Networks
Steve Gregory |
PKDD | 1 |
| 2002 | Exploiting Efficient Control and Data Structures in Logic Programs
Rong Yang 0004, Steve Gregory |
PADL | 2 |
| 2001 | Andorra Model Revised: Introducing Nested Domain Variables and a Targeted Search
Rong Yang 0004, Steve Gregory |
LPAR | 2 |
| 1995 | Tempo: A Declarative Concurrent Programming Language
Steve Gregory |
ICLP | 1 |
| 1993 | Constructing Minimum Path Configurations for Multiprocessor Systems
Alain G. Chalmers, Steve Gregory |
Parallel Comput. | 2 |
| 1992 | Debugging Tools for Concurrent Logic ProgrammingabstractA problem which confronts the developers of concurrent logic programming (CLP) systems concerns the design of the programming environment, particularly the provision of debugging tools. Debugging tools are useful for many activities besides identifying bugs: they can help in program testing and demonstration, in software experiments, and in teaching the language semantics. For CLP languages the questions of what debugging tools should be provided, and of how they should be used, are still open. Although the languages are closely related to other logic programming and concurrent programming languages, they are sufficiently different that new debugging techniques are required. This paper describes a primarily channel-oriented debugging methodology and a set of debugging tools that we have developed in the light of our experience in using and teaching the CLP language Parlog. With these tools a programmer can test a program by observing communication on channels, opening up a process to examine the activity on internal channels and, if necessary, to check in detail the execution steps of a process. Almost all of the ideas, which are equally applicable to other CLP languages, have been implemented in two commercial Parlog systems. As well as fulfilling the needs of existing users of CLP languages, we believe that the tools emphasise the attractions of CLP as a concurrent programming paradigm, since they are made possible by the unique attributes of CLP. Tom Conlon, Steve Gregory |
Comput. J. | 2 |
| 1989 | Pandora: Non-deterministic Parallel Logic Programming
Reem Bahgat, Steve Gregory |
ICLP | 2 |
| 1987 | PARLOG and PROLOG United
Keith L. Clark, Steve Gregory |
ICLP | 2 |
| 1987 | PARLOG and ALICE : A Marriage of Convenience
Melissa Lam, Steve Gregory |
ICLP | 2 |
| 1986 | A Sequential Implementation of Parlog
Ian T. Foster, Steve Gregory, Graem A. Ringwood, Ken Satoh |
ICLP | 2 |
| 1986 | Parlog: Parallel Programming in LogicabstractPARLOG is a logic programming language in the sense that nearly every definition and query can be read as a sentence of predicate logic. It differs from PROLOG in incorporating parallel modes of evaluation. For reasons of efficient implementation, it distinguishes and separates and-parallel and or-parallel evaluation. PARLOG relations are divided into two types: single-solution relations and all-solutions relations. A conjunction of single-solution relation calls can be evaluated in parallel with shared variables acting as communication channels for the passing of partial bindings. Only one solution to each call is computed, using committed choice nondeterminism. A conjunction of all-solutions relation calls is evaluated without communication of partial bindings, but all the solutions may be found by an or-parallel exploration of the different evaluation paths. A set constructor provides the main interface between single-solution relations and all-solutions relations. This paper is a tutorial introduction to PARLOG. It assumes familiarity with logic programming. Categories and Subject Descriptors: D.l.l [Programming Techniques]: Applicative (Functional) Keith L. Clark, Steve Gregory |
ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. | 2 |
| 1984 | Parlog for Discrete Event Simulation
Krysia Broda, Steve Gregory |
ICLP | 2 |