Added peer review
This commit is contained in:
parent
e6a7f67825
commit
aff7f38e97
2
.gitignore
vendored
2
.gitignore
vendored
@ -1 +1 @@
|
|||||||
main.pdf
|
*.pdf
|
||||||
|
30
review.typ
Normal file
30
review.typ
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
|
|||||||
|
#align(center, [
|
||||||
|
= Review of "Abstract Interpretations, Numerical Domains" by Silvia Gaspari
|
||||||
|
== Matthias Veigel
|
||||||
|
])
|
||||||
|
=== Summary
|
||||||
|
The paper deals with numerical domains and how they work.
|
||||||
|
The domains are all based on a concept called latice, which is an ordered set of sets with #sym.tack.t as empty set and #sym.tack.b as set which includes everything from the other sets.
|
||||||
|
The different domains specified in this paper are: Interval: number #sym.in [a,b], Polyhedron: lattice of intervals, Zone: x #sym.in [a,b] and x - y < constant, Octagon: Extension of zone domain with #sym.plus.minus x #sym.plus.minus y < constant, Pentagon: x,y are program variables and x #sym.in interval and x < y -> y as upper bound.
|
||||||
|
These domains can then be used to constrain variables.
|
||||||
|
=== Previous experience
|
||||||
|
I have no previous experience with lattices or numerical domains.
|
||||||
|
=== General Feedback
|
||||||
|
#[
|
||||||
|
#set list(marker: [+])
|
||||||
|
- Good Structure, Domains ordered from least to most complex
|
||||||
|
- Detailed explanation of domains
|
||||||
|
- Methodology is clearly described
|
||||||
|
]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
#[
|
||||||
|
#set list(marker: [--])
|
||||||
|
- Many typos
|
||||||
|
- Incomplete sentences
|
||||||
|
- Inconsistent capitalization
|
||||||
|
- The text of figure 1 and figure 2 is hard to read, because it is too small.
|
||||||
|
- Figure 1: 0 and +/- are too close together.
|
||||||
|
- Section 4.2: Should use #sym.NN,#sym.ZZ,#sym.QQ,#sym.RR instead of N,Z,Q,R (possible with `\mathbb{N}` in latex, `#sym.NN` in typst)
|
||||||
|
]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The paper has a good structure and the different domains are clearly described. A big problem in the paper is the missing explanation for lattices, since most of the paper is build on this concept. I also noticed a few logic mistakes in section 4.1: arithmetic operators: (+) - (-) should result in (+) not #sym.tack.b, (-) - (-) should result in #sym.tack.b not (-), (+) \* (+) should result in (+) not (-). The papers are also not really evaluated yet, only the content in them is summarized currently. Another useful thing to include would be the table from 0:25 in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWUXclaKppk for initial understanding and comparison of the numerical domains.
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user