ICACT20260382 Question.1
Questioner: hripsime.hovhannisyan@rau.am 2026-02-09 오전 11:03:27 |
ICACT20260382 Answer.1
Answer by Auhor hovhannes.movsisyan@rau.am 2026-02-09 오전 11:03:27
Chrome  Click!! |
| Have you compared the tool with existing ones? |
Not yet. Our primary goal for this work was to show that the proposed method works for path feasibility analysis. We are going to do it in the future, verifying other static analysers results that use similar tools. |
ICACT20260382 Question.2
Questioner: arjunvirvashisht@gmail.com 2026-02-10 오후 1:58:49 |
ICACT20260382 Answer.2
Answer by Auhor hovhannes.movsisyan@rau.am 2026-02-10 오후 1:58:49
Chrome Click!! |
| Which existing static analyzers do you plan to compare your tool against in the future? |
Probably with well-known tools like Clang Static Analyzer, Infer, etc. We are going to verify or reject these tools reports using our method. |
ICACT20260382 Question.3
Questioner: hominpark@etri.re.kr 2026-02-10 오후 2:02:28 |
ICACT20260382 Answer.3
Answer by Auhor hovhannes.movsisyan@rau.am 2026-02-10 오후 2:02:28
Chrome Click!! |
| Unlike the synthetic Juliet results, can your method resolve path explosion and ensure practical analysis speeds in real-world large-scale software? |
We have results on real-world projects, too. Some results are presented in slide 18. For example, our method verified paths on openssl and ffmpeg. All the reported issues have been verified by these project maintainers. |
