EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Claus Lewerentz
dblp:l/CLewerentz
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2005
0000-0002-2972-944XORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3Theory of computation · 3 · 2 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
2 papers |
Program analysis · 49% Software maintenance and evolution · 49% Requirements engineering and software design · 2% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Data models and query languages · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software maintenance and evolution › reverse engineering
design pattern detection |
0.1 | 1 | 2005 | Efficient Relational Calculation for Software Analysis · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2005 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking › symbolic model checking
BDD-based verification |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | Rabbit: A Tool for BDD-Based Verification of Real-Time Systems · CAV 2003 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
real-time verification |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | Rabbit: A Tool for BDD-Based Verification of Real-Time Systems · CAV 2003 |
Data models and query languages › query language design
relational query languages |
0.0 | 1 | 2005 | Efficient Relational Calculation for Software Analysis · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2005 |
Requirements engineering and software design
graph grammar |
0.0 | 1 | 1992 | Building Integrated Software Development Environments Part I: Tool Specification · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 1992 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
predicate calculus · 0.1binary decision diagrams · 0.1binary decision diagram · 0.1graph grammar engineering · 0.0attributed graphs · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | Efficient Relational Calculation for Software AnalysisabstractCalculating with graphs and relations has many applications in the analysis of software systems, for example, the detection of design patterns or patterns of problematic design and the computation of design metrics. These applications require an expressive query language, in particular, for the detection of graph patterns, and an efficient evaluation of the queries even for large graphs. In this paper, we introduce RML, a simple language for querying and manipulating relations based on predicate calculus, and CrocoPat, an interpreter for RML programs. RML is general because it enables the manipulation not only of graphs (i.e., binary relations), but of relations of arbitrary arity. CrocoPat executes RML programs efficiently because it internally represents relations as binary decision diagrams, a data structure that is well-known as a compact representation of large relations in computer-aided verification. We evaluate RML by giving example programs for several software analyses and CrocoPat by comparing its performance with calculators for binary relations, a Prolog system, and a relational database management system. Dirk Beyer 0001, Andreas Noack 0001, Claus Lewerentz |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 3 |
| 2003 | Rabbit: A Tool for BDD-Based Verification of Real-Time Systems
Dirk Beyer 0001, Claus Lewerentz, Andreas Noack 0001 |
CAV | 2 |
| 2001 | CrocoCosmos
Claus Lewerentz, Frank Simon, Frank Steinbrückner |
GD | 1 |
| 1992 | Building Integrated Software Development Environments Part I: Tool SpecificationabstractThe conceptual modeling approach of the IPSEN (Integrated Project Support Environment) project for building highly integrated environments is based on using attributed graphs to model and implement arbitrary object structures, in particular all kinds of software documents and their relationships. A language based on graph grammars, called PROGRESS (PROgrammed Graph REwriting SyStems), and a suitable method for the application of this language, called graph grammar engineering, have been developed over the last ten years. This language and method are being extensively used for specifying the complex graph structures of internal document representations as well as for specifying the functionality of all tools (editors, browsers, analyzers, debuggers) working on these internal rpresentations. This paper explains the language and the method for applying the language based on a pragmatic nontrivial example of a software production process and its corresponding documents. In particular, it is shown why and how a graph grammar-based strongly typed language is perfectly suitable to formally specify highly integrated software tools. In addition, it is shown that the implementation of these tools (i.e., an environment composed of these tools) is systematically being derived from the formal specifications. Gregor Engels, Claus Lewerentz, Manfred Nagl, Wilhelm Schäfer, Andy Schürr |
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. | 2 |
| 1987 | On Integration Mechanisms within a Graph-based Software Development Environment
Claus Lewerentz, Manfred Nagl, Bernhard Westfechtel |
WG | 1 |