Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Eric Lu
dblp:172/6890
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0003-1228-9887ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
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.
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 50% Approximation and online algorithms · 38% Computational complexity · 12% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Graph learning · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Operating systems · 77% Compilers and program optimization · 23% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph neural network |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Are Graph Neural Networks Optimal Approximation Algorithms? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
message passing |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Are Graph Neural Networks Optimal Approximation Algorithms? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Approximation and online algorithms
approximation algorithms |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Are Graph Neural Networks Optimal Approximation Algorithms? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Mathematical optimization › convex relaxation
semidefinite relaxation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Are Graph Neural Networks Optimal Approximation Algorithms? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Mathematical optimization
combinatorial optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Are Graph Neural Networks Optimal Approximation Algorithms? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Computational complexity › constraint satisfaction
Max-CSP |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Are Graph Neural Networks Optimal Approximation Algorithms? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Compilers and program optimization › code generation
assembly code generation |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Towards Porting Operating Systems with Program Synthesis · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
semidefinite programming · 1.5convex relaxation · 1.5symbolic execution · 0.7program specialization · 0.7domain-specific language · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Are Graph Neural Networks Optimal Approximation Algorithms?abstractIn this work we design graph neural network architectures that capture optimal
approximation algorithms for a large class of combinatorial optimization problems,
using powerful algorithmic tools from semidefinite programming (SDP). Concretely, we prove that polynomial-sized message-passing algorithms can represent
the most powerful polynomial time algorithms for Max Constraint Satisfaction
Problems assuming the Unique Games Conjecture. We leverage this result to
construct efficient graph neural network architectures, OptGNN, that obtain high quality approximate solutions on landmark combinatorial optimization problems
such as Max-Cut, Min-Vertex-Cover, and Max-3-SAT. Our approach achieves
strong empirical results across a wide range of real-world and synthetic datasets
against solvers and neural baselines. Finally, we take advantage of OptGNN’s
ability to capture convex relaxations to design an algorithm for producing bounds
on the optimal solution from the learned embeddings of OptGNN. Morris Yau, Nikolaos Karalias, Eric Lu, Jessica Xu, Stefanie Jegelka |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2023 | Towards Porting Operating Systems with Program SynthesisabstractThe end of Moore’s Law has ushered in a diversity of hardware not seen in decades. Operating system (OS) (and system software) portability is accordingly becoming increasingly critical. Simultaneously, there has been tremendous progress in program synthesis. We set out to explore the feasibility of using modern program synthesis to generate the machine-dependent parts of an operating system. Our ultimate goal is to generate new ports automatically from descriptions of new machines. One of the issues involved is writing specifications, both for machine-dependent operating system functionality and for instruction set architectures. We designed two domain-specific languages: Alewife for machine-independent specifications of machine-dependent operating system functionality and Cassiopea for describing instruction set architecture semantics. Automated porting also requires an implementation. We developed a toolchain that, given an Alewife specification and a Cassiopea machine description, specializes the machine-independent specification to the target instruction set architecture and synthesizes an implementation in assembly language with a customized symbolic execution engine. Using this approach, we demonstrate the successful synthesis of a total of 140 OS components from two pre-existing OSes for four real hardware platforms. We also developed several optimization methods for OS-related assembly synthesis to improve scalability. The effectiveness of our languages and ability to synthesize code for all 140 specifications is evidence of the feasibility of program synthesis for machine-dependent OS code. However, many research challenges remain; we also discuss the benefits and limitations of our synthesis-based approach to automated OS porting. Jingmei Hu, Eric Lu, David A. Holland, Ming Kawaguchi, Stephen Chong, Margo I. Seltzer |
ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. | 2 |
| 2019 | Trials and Tribulations in Synthesizing Operating SystemsabstractRecent advances in program synthesis convinced us that it was the right time to transform the process of porting an operating system into a program synthesis problem. We set out to synthesize the needed machine dependent code for an existing operating system. This undertaking proved far more challenging than we anticipated. We summarize our experience and lessons learned and propose next steps in realizing such an undertaking. Jingmei Hu, Eric Lu, David A. Holland, Ming Kawaguchi, Stephen Chong, Margo I. Seltzer |
PLOS@SOSP | 2 |