Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mark Shlimovich
dblp:09/3626
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—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 |
Program analysis · 61% Software testing · 39% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program analysis › symbolic execution
dynamic symbolic execution |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Predictive testing: amplifying the effectiveness of software testing · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007 |
Program analysis
symbolic execution |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Predictive testing: amplifying the effectiveness of software testing · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007 |
Software testing › test generation
test amplification |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Predictive testing: amplifying the effectiveness of software testing · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007 |
Software testing › test generation
automated test generation |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | Predictive testing: amplifying the effectiveness of software testing · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
symbolic analysis · 0.1concolic execution · 0.1assertion hoisting · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | Predictive testing: amplifying the effectiveness of software testingabstractTesting with manually generated test cases often results in poor coverage and fails to discover many corner case bugs and security vulnerabilities. Automated test generation techniques based on static or symbolic analysis usually do not scale beyond small program units. We propose predictive testing, a new method for amplifying the effectiveness of existing test cases using symbolic analysis. We assume that a software system has an associated test suite consisting of a set of test inputs and a set of program invariants, in the form of a set of assert statements that the software must always satisfy. Predictive testing uses a combination of concrete and symbolic execution, similar to concolic execution, on the provided test inputs to discover if any of the assertions encountered along a test execution path could be violated for some closely related inputs. We extend predictive testing to catch bugs related to memory-safety violations, integer overflows, and string-related vulnerabilities. Furthermore, we propose a novel technique that leverages the results of unit testing to hoist assertions located deep inside the body of a unit function to the beginning of the unit function. This enables predictive testing to encounter assertions more often in test executions and thereby significantly amplifies the effectiveness of testing. Pallavi Joshi, Koushik Sen, Mark Shlimovich |
ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE | 3 |