2nd international workshop on Program Comprehension through Dynamic Analysis
PCODA 2006

Co-located with the 13th WCRE, October 23, 2006, Benevento, Italy

Program chairs

Orla Greevy
Software Composition Group

Institut fur Informatik

und angewandte Mathematik

University of Bern

Switzerland

greevy@iam.unibe.ch

 

Abdelwahab Hamou-Lhadj

School of Information

Technology and Engineering

University of Ottawa

Canada

ahamou@site.uottawa.ca

 

Andy Zaidman

Lab On Re Engineering

University of Antwerp

Belgium

and
Software Evolution Research Lab
Delft University of Technology
The Netherlands

Andy.Zaidman@ua.ac.be


Program Committee

Gabriela Arevalo
LIRMM, Montpellier, France
Lewis Baumstark
University of West Georgia, USA
Bas Cornelissen
Delft Univ. of Technology
Serge Demeyer
University of Antwerp, Belgium
Stephane Ducasse
University of Savoie, France
Tudor Girba
University of Berne, Switzerland
Orla Greevy
University of Berne, Switzerland
Abdelwahab Hamou-Lhadj
University of Ottawa, Canada
Andrew Malton
University of Waterloo, Canada
Arie van Deursen
Delft Univ. of Technology
Andy Zaidman
University of Antwerp, Belgium & Delft Univ. of Technology, The Netherlands
 

Important dates

Submissions
 12th September 2006

Notification
 27th September 2006

Camera ready

 10th October 2006

Workshop

 23rd October 2006

 

Other workshops in this series

 

PCODA 2005

PCODA 2007

Context
PCODA 2006 builds upon PCODA 2005, held last year at WCRE in Pittsburgh, USA. Last year we had eleven high-quality papers, which were summarized by 3 presenters. This setup allowed for a very discussion-oriented workshop, where differences and similarities between the discussed techniques were highlighted, where general difficulties of using dynamic analysis were discussed and where possible future research directions became clear. We hope to continue this trend in PCODA 2006 and we would like to invite you to submit papers and join the workshop in Benevento, Italy.

Overview
Without consistent or adequately complete documentation, maintainers are faced with the inevitable problem of understanding how the system is implemented prior to undertaking any maintenance task. Research into the discipline of program comprehension aims to reduce the impact of this problem. Studies have shown that software engineers tend to spend up to 50% of their time trying to comprehend the structure of a software system.
PCODA focuses on program comprehension techniques that rely specifically on dynamic analysis.

Proceedings
The proceedings of PCODA 2006 can be found here [PDF, 5 MB]

Topics
Topics of interest include, but are not restricted to, the following:

  • Program comprehension models
    • Theories and models for software comprehension based on dynamic analysis
    • Program comprehension processes and strategies involving dynamic analysis techniques
    • Research methodologies
  • Techniques and tools
    • Applications of dynamic analysis techniques to program comprehension
    • Strengths and limitations of existing dynamic analysis techniques
    • Trace analysis and exploration techniques
    • Techniques for reducing the large size of run-time information
    • Hybrid analyses that involve both static and dynamic analysis
    • Dynamic analysis tools with an emphasis on program comprehension
  • Evaluation Techniques
    • Criteria for evaluating dynamic analysis techniques
    • Experiments and case studies with a focus on program comprehension using dynamic analysis
    • Empirical effectiveness studies

Program

  • Patterns & behavior
    [session summarized by Andy Zaidman; PDF slides]
    • A Hybrid Analysis Framework to Evaluate Runtime Behavior of OO Systems
      Azin Ashkan, Ladan Tahvildari
    • Summarizing Traces as Signals in Time
      Adrian Kuhn, Orla Greevy
    • An Environment for Pattern based Dynamic Analysis of Software Systems
      Kamran Sartipi and Hossein Safyallah
  • Reverse engineering
    [session summarized by Orla Greevy; PDF slides]
    • Aiding in the Comprehension of Testsuites
      Bas Cornelissen, Arie van Deursen, Leon Moonen
    • A Lightweight Approach to Determining the Adequacy of Tests as Documentation
      Joris Van Geet, Andy Zaidman
  • High level dynamic analysis views
    [session summarized by Bas Cornelissen; PDF slides]
    • Combining Reverse Engineering Techniques for Product Lines
      Dharmalingam Ganesan, Isabel John, Jens  Knodel 

         Higher Abstractions for Dynamic Analysis
Marcus Denker, Orla Greevy, Michele Lanza

         Capturing How Objects Flow At Runtime
Adrian Lienhard, Stephane Ducasse, Tudor Gırba and Oscar Nierstrasz

 

The workshop will be 1/2 day, discussion-oriented. Afterwards, each participant will be asked to formulate a short summary of the workshop (maximum 250 words), highlighting points of interest of his or her research. These summaries will be posted on a website (the URL will be determined later), so that possible collaborations will become visible.

Be standard. There exists a lot of work on reengineering, which may give rise to some terminology conflicts. We encourage people to use the reengineering taxonomy defined in (E. J. Chikofsky and J. H. C. II. Reverse engineering and design recovery: A taxonomy, IEEE Software, 7(1):1317, 1990.)

Be electronic. Submit your position paper in HTML, postcript or PDF (preferably), so that we can collect all of the submissions on a website. A separate abstract including the e-mail addresses of the authors and URLs of their home pages MUST be submitted in HTML. Submit everything by e-mail to both of the two following e-mail addresses ahamou@site.uottawa.ca and greevy@iam.unibe.ch

Be short. Propose only one idea. We all know that you are a quality researcher with plenty of good ideas. Only, we have limited resources and we must focus. Please keep all position papers under five pages.

Be innovative. It is okay to propose a recent idea that still has some unfinished sides to it. It is supposed to be a WORKshop, not a mini-conference. If you want to propose a crazy idea, introduce it in an extended abstract (1 page).

Be a rebel. Neglect these guidelines if you feel that your idea needs a special treatment in some way.