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

Neelam Soundararajan

dblp:99/2478 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
11ranked-venue papers
6as first author
0since 2021 · last 1988
—ORCID · none

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

Theory of computation · 6 · 5 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 1 first-authorArtificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Systems, architecture and hardware · 1Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Distributed systems · 100%
Theoretical computer science
3 papers
Logic in computer science · 50% Computational complexity · 50%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Transaction processing and concurrency control · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Programming languages and type systems · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 100%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Transaction processing and concurrency control
deadlock detection
0.011988
A Distributed Deadlock Detection and Resolution Algorithm and Its Correctness Proof · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Distributed systems › fault tolerance
deadlock detection and resolution
0.011988
A Distributed Deadlock Detection and Resolution Algorithm and Its Correctness Proof · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Distributed systems
fault tolerance
0.011988
A Distributed Deadlock Detection and Resolution Algorithm and Its Correctness Proof · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988
Programming languages and type systems › language semantics › formal semantics
axiomatic semantics
0.011984
Axiomatic Semantics of Communicating Sequential Processes · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 1984
Logic in computer science
semantics
0.011984
Axiomatic Semantics of Communicating Sequential Processes · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 1984
Logic in computer science › formal methods
correctness proofs
0.011988
A Distributed Deadlock Detection and Resolution Algorithm and Its Correctness Proof · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1988

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

communicating sequential processes · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1988 A Proof System for Distributed Processes
Ann E. Kelley Sobel, Neelam Soundararajan
Acta Informatica2
1988 A Distributed Deadlock Detection and Resolution Algorithm and Its Correctness Proof
abstract
The key idea of the algorithm is to let one transaction controller be in charge of all transactions in a set of interacting transactions. Two transactions are interacting if they are both interested in (accessing) the same resource. In addition, the controller is in charge of all the resources allocated to any of the transactions in the set. Having one controller in charge of all the transactions in a set of interacting transactions and all the resources allocated to them makes it easier to detect deadlocks and avoid them. The main problem dealt with is how a controller takes charge of another transaction when the transaction tries to access one of the resources currently in the control of the controller and how a controller releases a transaction back to its original controller when the transaction is no longer interested in any of the resources in which one or more of the other transactions are also interested. Communicating sequential processes (CSP) is used to code the algorithm. The correctness of the algorithm is proved in a semiformal manner.>
Ahmed K. Elmagarmid, Neelam Soundararajan, Ming T. Liu
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.2
1987 Complexity in Classificatory Reasoning
Ashok K. Goel 0001, Neelam Soundararajan, B. Chandrasekaran 0001
AAAI2
1987 Proof Rules for Fault Tolerant Distributed Programs
Mathai Joseph, Abha Moitra, Neelam Soundararajan
Sci. Comput. Program.3
1986 Total Correctness of CSP Programs
Neelam Soundararajan
Acta Informatica1
1985 : Distributed Discrete Event Simulation using Dataflow
Neelam Soundararajan, Roger L. Costello
ICPP2
1984 A proof technique for parallel programs
Neelam Soundararajan
Theor. Comput. Sci.1
1984 Denotational Semantics of CSP
Neelam Soundararajan
Theor. Comput. Sci.1
1984 Axiomatic Semantics of Communicating Sequential Processes
abstract
A simple definition of the axiomatic semantics of Communicating Sequential Processes is presented.The most important aspect of the approach is that it allows dealing with the individual processes of a program in isolation from the other processes.The axiomatic semantics is used to prove the correctness of a program for partitioning sets.
Neelam Soundararajan
ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst.1
1983 Correctness Proofs of CSP Programs
Neelam Soundararajan
Theor. Comput. Sci.1
1979 Axiomatic Proofs of Fotal Correctness of Programs
Neelam Soundararajan
Inf. Process. Lett.1