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

A. D. Lunn

dblp:72/5061 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1995
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Theory of computation · 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 · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › test coverage
code coverage
0.011995
A Model of Code Sharing for Estimating Software Failure on Demand Probabilities · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1995
Software testing
statistical testing
0.011995
A Model of Code Sharing for Estimating Software Failure on Demand Probabilities · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1995
Software testing
test adequacy
0.011995
A Model of Code Sharing for Estimating Software Failure on Demand Probabilities · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1995

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

white-box testing · 0.0statistical analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1995 New Statistics for Demand-Based Software Testing
John H. R. May, A. D. Lunn
Inf. Process. Lett.2
1995 A Model of Code Sharing for Estimating Software Failure on Demand Probabilities
abstract
A statistical software testing model is proposed in which white box factors have a role. The model combines test adequacy notions with statistical analysis, and in so doing provides a rudimentary treatment of dependencies between test results caused by the execution of common code during the tests. The model is used to estimate the probability of failure on demand for software performing safety shutdown functions on large plants and concerns the case where extensive test results are available on the latest version of the software, none of which have resulted in software failure. According to the model, there are circumstances in which some current statistical models for dynamic software testing are too conservative, and others are not conservative, depending on the software architecture.>
John H. R. May, A. D. Lunn
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.2