VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Eric Mullen
dblp:19/9842
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 2 first-authorTheory of computation · 3 · 1 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 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
2 papers |
Compilers and program optimization · 68% Program verification · 32% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Systems and software security · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program verification › formal proof
mechanized proof |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Verified peephole optimizations for CompCert · PLDI 2016 |
Compilers and program optimization › compiler optimization › local optimization
peephole optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Verified peephole optimizations for CompCert · PLDI 2016 |
Compilers and program optimization › verified compilation
translation validation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Verified peephole optimizations for CompCert · PLDI 2016 |
Compilers and program optimization
verified compilation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Verified peephole optimizations for CompCert · PLDI 2016 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
liveness analysis · 0.2coq · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Continuous Formal Verification of Amazon s2n
Andrey Chudnov, Nathan Collins, Byron Cook, Joey Dodds, Brian Huffman, Colm MacCárthaigh, Stephen Magill, Eric Mertens, Eric Mullen, Serdar Tasiran, Aaron Tomb, Eddy Westbrook |
CAV (2) | 9 |
| 2018 | Œuf: minimizing the Coq extraction TCBabstractVerifying systems by implementing them in the programming language of a proof assistant (e.g., Gallina for Coq) lets us directly leverage the full power of the proof assistant for verifying the system. But, to execute such an implementation requires extraction, a large complicated process that is in the trusted computing base (TCB). Eric Mullen, Stuart Pernsteiner, James R. Wilcox, Zachary Tatlock, Dan Grossman |
CPP | 1 |
| 2018 | Software Verification with ITPs Should Use Binary Code Extraction to Reduce the TCB - (Short Paper)
Ramana Kumar, Eric Mullen, Zachary Tatlock, Magnus O. Myreen |
ITP | 2 |
| 2016 | Verified peephole optimizations for CompCertabstractTransformations over assembly code are common in many compilers. These transformations are also some of the most bug-dense compiler components. Such bugs could be elim- inated by formally verifying the compiler, but state-of-the- art formally verified compilers like CompCert do not sup- port assembly-level program transformations. This paper presents Peek, a framework for expressing, verifying, and running meaning-preserving assembly-level program trans- formations in CompCert. Peek contributes four new com- ponents: a lower level semantics for CompCert x86 syntax, a liveness analysis, a library for expressing and verifying peephole optimizations, and a verified peephole optimiza- tion pass built into CompCert. Each of these is accompanied by a correctness proof in Coq against realistic assumptions about the calling convention and the system memory alloca- tor. Verifying peephole optimizations in Peek requires prov- ing only a set of local properties, which we have proved are sufficient to ensure global transformation correctness. We have proven these local properties for 28 peephole transfor- mations from the literature. We discuss the development of our new assembly semantics, liveness analysis, representa- tion of program transformations, and execution engine; de- scribe the verification challenges of each component; and detail techniques we applied to mitigate the proof burden. Eric Mullen, Daryl Zuniga, Zachary Tatlock, Dan Grossman |
PLDI | 1 |
| 2011 | Muddy hill gamesabstractComputer games are widely used as pedagogical tools in the classroom. In recent years, the use of game projects in Computer Science (CS) curriculum has grown in popularity. The Muddy Hill Games project marries these ideas by engaging CS students in the design and development of educational games for middle school students. This approach enhances the game projects by providing a real customer and users. It results in free educational software that serves middle school learning objectives. Finally, it informs middle school students' understanding of Computer Science and motivates interest in the field. Here we describe four games that have come out of the project. Jessica Blevins, Andy Kearney, Eric Mullen, Emily Myers-Stanhope, Elizabeth Sweedyk |
ITiCSE | 3 |