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

Damien Doligez

dblp:23/55 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
9ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 5 · 3 first-authorTheory of computation · 4Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3

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
4 papers
Program analysis · 22% Program verification · 22% Compilers and program optimization · 22%
Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Logic in computer science · 100%
Network and information security
1 paper
Systems and software security · 100%

Topics — the 10 heaviest of 14, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Logic in computer science › temporal logic
temporal logic of actions
0.112012
TLA + Proofs · FM 2012
Program verification
model checking
0.112009
A foundation for flow-based program matching: using temporal logic and model checking · POPL 2009
Compilers and program optimization
program transformation
0.112009
A foundation for flow-based program matching: using temporal logic and model checking · POPL 2009
Logic in computer science › temporal logic › branching-time temporal logic
CTL
0.112009
A foundation for flow-based program matching: using temporal logic and model checking · POPL 2009
Logic in computer science
temporal logic
0.112009
A foundation for flow-based program matching: using temporal logic and model checking · POPL 2009
Runtime systems and virtual machines
garbage collection
0.021994
Portable, Unobtrusive Garbage Collection for Multiprocessor Systems · POPL 1994
A Concurrent, Generational Garbage Collector for a Multithreaded Implementation of ML · POPL 1993
Memory systems
memory management
0.011994
Portable, Unobtrusive Garbage Collection for Multiprocessor Systems · POPL 1994
Runtime systems and virtual machines › garbage collection
concurrent garbage collection
0.011993
A Concurrent, Generational Garbage Collector for a Multithreaded Implementation of ML · POPL 1993
Runtime systems and virtual machines › garbage collection
generational garbage collection
0.011993
A Concurrent, Generational Garbage Collector for a Multithreaded Implementation of ML · POPL 1993
Parallel and multicore computing
multiprocessor system
0.011994
Portable, Unobtrusive Garbage Collection for Multiprocessor Systems · POPL 1994

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

strong typing · 0.4OCaml · 0.4temporal logic · 0.2model checking · 0.2TLA+ · 0.1on-the-fly garbage collection · 0.0copying collection · 0.0concurrent marking · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 Avoiding Security Pitfalls with Functional Programming: A Report on the Development of a Secure XML Validator
abstract
While the use of XML is pervading all areas of IT, security challenges arise when XML files are used to transfer security data such as security policies. To tackle this issue, we have developed a lightweight secure XML validator and have chosen to base the development on the strongly typed functional language OCaml. The initial development took place as part of the LaFoSec Study which aimed at investigating the impact of using functional languages for security. We then turned the validator into an industrial application, which was successfully evaluated at EAL4+ level by independent assessors. In this paper, we explain the challenges involved in processing XML data in a critical context, we describe our choices in designing a secure XML validator, and we detail how we used features of functional languages to enforce security requirements.
Damien Doligez, Christèle Faure, Thérèse Hardin, Manuel Maarek
ICSE (2)1
2013 Zenon Modulo: When Achilles Outruns the Tortoise Using Deduction Modulo
David Delahaye, Damien Doligez, Frédéric Gilbert 0002, Pierre Halmagrand, Olivier Hermant
LPAR2
2012 TLA + Proofs
Denis Cousineau 0002, Damien Doligez, Leslie Lamport, Stephan Merz, Daniel Ricketts 0001, Hernán Vanzetto
FM2
2010 The TLA+ Proof System: Building a Heterogeneous Verification Platform
Kaustuv Chaudhuri, Damien Doligez, Leslie Lamport, Stephan Merz
ICTAC2
2009 A foundation for flow-based program matching: using temporal logic and model checking
abstract
Reasoning about program control-flow paths is an important functionality of a number of recent program matching languages and associated searching and transformation tools. Temporal logic provides a well-defined means of expressing properties of control-flow paths in programs, and indeed an extension of the temporal logic CTL has been applied to the problem of specifying and verifying the transformations commonly performed by optimizing compilers. Nevertheless, in developing the Coccinelle program transformation tool for performing Linux collateral evolutions in systems code, we have found that existing variants of CTL do not adequately support rules that transform subterms other than the ones matching an entire formula. Being able to transform any of the subterms of a matched term seems essential in the domain targeted by Coccinelle.
Julien Brunel, Damien Doligez, René Rydhof Hansen, Julia Lawall, Gilles Muller
POPL2
2007 Zenon : An Extensible Automated Theorem Prover Producing Checkable Proofs
Richard Bonichon, David Delahaye, Damien Doligez
LPAR3
2002 Algorithms and Proofs Inheritancey in the FOC Language
Virgile Prevosto, Damien Doligez
J. Autom. Reason.2
1994 Portable, Unobtrusive Garbage Collection for Multiprocessor Systems
abstract
We describe and prove the correctness of a new concurrent mark-and-sweep garbage collection algorithm. This algorithm derives from the classical on-the-fly algorithm from Dijkstra et al. [9]. A distinguishing feature of our algorithm is that it supports multiprocessor environments where the registers of running processes are not readily accessible, without imposing any overhead on the elementary operations of loading a register or reading or initializing a field. Furthermore our collector never blocks running mutator processes except possibly on requests for free memory; in particular, updating a field or creating or marking or sweeping a heap object does not involve system-dependent synchronization primitives such as locks. We also provide support for process creation and deletion, and for managing an extensible heap of variable-sized objects.
Damien Doligez, Georges Gonthier
POPL1
1993 A Concurrent, Generational Garbage Collector for a Multithreaded Implementation of ML
abstract
This paper presents the design and implementation of a “quasi real-time” garbage collector for Concurrent Caml Light, an implementation of ML with threads. This two-generation system combines a fast, asynchronous copying collector on the young generation with a non-disruptive concurrent marking collector on the old generation. This design crucially relies on the ML compile-time distinction between mutable and immutable objects.
Damien Doligez, Xavier Leroy
POPL1