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

Kurt Woodham

dblp:07/6085 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2008
—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%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › test adequacy › coverage criteria
structural coverage criteria
0.112008
ReqsCov: A Tool for Measuring Test-Adequacy over Requirements · ASE 2008
Software testing
test adequacy
0.112008
ReqsCov: A Tool for Measuring Test-Adequacy over Requirements · ASE 2008

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

linear temporal logic · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2008 ReqsCov: A Tool for Measuring Test-Adequacy over Requirements
abstract
When creating test cases for software, a common approach is to create tests that exercise requirements. Determining the adequacy of test cases, however, is generally done through inspection or indirectly by measuring structural coverage of an executable artifact (such as source code or a software model). We present ReqsCov, a tool to directly measure requirements coverage provided by test cases. ReqsCov allows users to measure Linear Temporal Logic requirements coverage using three increasingly rigorous requirements coverage metrics: naive coverage, antecedent coverage, and Unique First Cause coverage. By measuring requirements coverage, users are given insight into the quality of test suites beyond what is available when solely using structural coverage metrics over an implementation.
Matthew Staats, Weijia Deng, Ajitha Rajan, Mats P. E. Heimdahl, Kurt Woodham
ASE5