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

Lukas Armborst

dblp:296/2090 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-7565-0954ORCID · corroborated

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 3 first-author · 3 since 2021Theory of computation · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021

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 · 70% Compilers and program optimization · 23% Programming languages and type systems · 7%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification
concurrent program verification
0.812024
The VerCors Verifier: A Progress Report · CAV (2) 2024
Program verification
deductive verification
0.812024
The VerCors Verifier: A Progress Report · CAV (2) 2024
Compilers and program optimization
program transformation
0.812024
The VerCors Verifier: A Progress Report · CAV (2) 2024
Program verification › deductive verification
verification condition generation
0.812024
The VerCors Verifier: A Progress Report · CAV (2) 2024

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

program transformation · 0.8permission-based separation logic · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 AutoSV-Annotator: Integrating Deductive and Automatic Software Verification
abstract
Abstract Software model checking and deductive software verification have complementary strengths and weaknesses: software model checkers are more straight-forward to use, as they analyze the program without user input; but they do not yet support complicated data structures and expressive specifications. In contrast, deductive verifiers can verify expressive specifications and complex data structures modularly, but they require the user to specify the program behavior in detail, which is a time-consuming process. Due to their differing nature, the two approaches usually remain separate. However, for industrial usage, one requires both: ease of use as well as expressiveness. Therefore, we present AutoSV-Annotator , a toolchain that integrates the two approaches for C programs. The toolchain allows a user to iteratively refine the deductive annotations in a C program, calling a model checker to supplement the annotations at each iteration, guided by the already existing annotations. We show that our tool is able to annotate and prove many tasks from the SV-Benchmarks set. Our results show that the two strategies can indeed benefit from each other.
Lukas Armborst, Dirk Beyer 0001, Marieke Huisman, Marian Lingsch Rosenfeld
FMICS1
2024 The VerCors Verifier: A Progress Report
abstract
Abstract This paper gives an overview of the most recent developments on the VerCors verifier. VerCors is a deductive verifier for concurrent software, written in multiple programming languages, where the specifications are written in terms of pre-/postcondition contracts using permission-based separation logic. In essence, VerCors is a program transformation tool: it translates an annotated program into input for the Viper framework, which is then used as verification back-end. The paper discusses the different programming languages and features for which VerCors provides verification support. It also discusses how the tool internally has been reorganised to become easily extendible, and to improve the connection and interaction with Viper. In addition, we also introduce two tools built on top of VerCors, which support correctness-preserving transformations of verified programs. Finally, we discuss how the VerCors verifier has been used on a range of realistic case studies.
Lukas Armborst, Pieter Bos, Lars B. van den Haak, Marieke Huisman, Robert Rubbens, Ömer Sakar, Philip Tasche
CAV (2)1
2023 Joining Forces! Reusing Contracts for Deductive Verifiers Through Automatic Translation
Lukas Armborst, Sophie Lathouwers, Marieke Huisman
iFM1