Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mark Wilding
dblp:62/5888
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—ORCID · unresolved
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 · 77% Software maintenance and evolution · 12% Program analysis · 12% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing
test coverage |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | An iterative, multi-level, and scalable approach to comparing execution traces · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007 |
Software testing
trace comparison |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | An iterative, multi-level, and scalable approach to comparing execution traces · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007 |
Program analysis › dynamic analysis › trace analysis
execution trace analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | An iterative, multi-level, and scalable approach to comparing execution traces · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007 |
Software maintenance and evolution
program comprehension |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | An iterative, multi-level, and scalable approach to comparing execution traces · ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2007 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
trace compression · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | An iterative, multi-level, and scalable approach to comparing execution tracesabstractIn this paper, we overview a new approach to comparing execution traces. Such comparison can be useful for purposes such as improving test coverage and profiling system's users. In our approach, traces are compressed into different levels of compaction and are then compared iteratively from highest to lowest levels, rejecting dissimilar traces in the process and eventually leaving residual, similar traces. These residual traces form an important feedback for improvement or analysis goals. The preliminary results show that the approach is scalable for industrial use. Andriy V. Miranskyy, Nazim H. Madhavji, Mechelle Gittens, Matthew Davison 0001, Mark Wilding, David Godwin |
ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE | 5 |