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

Yosuke Yamamoto

dblp:120/0746 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 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
1 paper
Program verification · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification › refinement
program refinement
0.112012
Property-preserving program refinement · ASE 2012

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

partial evaluation · 0.1generalization · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Improving Calculation of Contextual Similarity for Constructing a Bilingual Dictionary via a Third Language
Takashi Tsunakawa, Yosuke Yamamoto, Hiroyuki Kaji
IJCNLP2
2012 Property-preserving program refinement
abstract
During the development and maintenance process, a program changes form, often being refined as specifications and implementation decisions are realized. A correctness proof built in parallel with an original program can be extended to a proof of refined program by showing equivalences between the original and refined program. This paper illustrates two examples of property-preserving refinement, partial evaluation and generalization, and explores the correctness-preserving equivalences underpinning those refinement techniques. We plan to explore ways in which the informal reasoning behind these and similar program refinement tasks may be captured to extend the proof for an original program into a proof of the refined program.
Yosuke Yamamoto
ASE1