Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Daniel D. Corkill
dblp:28/5577
· DBLP profile ↗
21ranked-venue papers
8as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 13 · 6 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 10 · 6 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 4 · 1 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 3 · 1 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 2Human-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.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Data mining · 87% Data models and query languages · 13% | |
| Artificial intelligence
12 papers |
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 40% Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 30% Multi-agent systems · 24% |
Topics — the 12 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Data mining
anomaly detection |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Detecting insider threats in a real corporate database of computer usage activity · KDD 2013 |
Data mining › anomaly detection
graph anomaly detection |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Detecting insider threats in a real corporate database of computer usage activity · KDD 2013 |
Data models and query languages › query language
visual query language |
0.0 | 1 | 2013 | Detecting insider threats in a real corporate database of computer usage activity · KDD 2013 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › cognitive modeling › cognitive architecture
blackboard architecture |
0.0 | 5 | 1991 | Achieving Flexibility, Efficiency, and Generality in Blackboard Architectures · AAAI 1987 GBB: A Generic Blackboard Development System · AAAI 1986 Embedable Problem-Solving Architectures: A Study of Integrating OPS5 with UMass GBB · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1991 |
Distributed systems › distributed coordination › multi-agent systems
distributed problem solving |
0.0 | 3 | 1989 | Coherent Cooperation Among Communicating Problem Solvers · IEEE Trans. Computers 1987 The Use of Meta-Level Control for Coordination in a Distributed Problem Solving Network · IJCAI 1983 Trends in Cooperative Distributed Problem Solving · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1989 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › cognitive modeling › cognitive architecture
problem-solving architecture |
0.0 | 1 | 1991 | Embedable Problem-Solving Architectures: A Study of Integrating OPS5 with UMass GBB · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1991 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
multi-agent planning |
0.0 | 1 | 1989 | Trends in Cooperative Distributed Problem Solving · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1989 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems
distributed problem solving |
0.0 | 1 | 1985 | Increasing Coherence in a Distributed Problem-Solving Network · IJCAI 1985 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.0 | 1 | 1984 | Selective Abstraction of AI System Activity · AAAI 1984 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
hierarchical planning |
0.0 | 1 | 1979 | Hierarchical Planning in a Distributed Environment · IJCAI 1979 |
Distributed systems
distributed coordination |
0.0 | 1 | 1985 | Increasing Coherence in a Distributed Problem-Solving Network · IJCAI 1985 |
Human-AI interaction
system transparency |
0.0 | 1 | 1984 | Selective Abstraction of AI System Activity · AAAI 1984 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
temporal sequence analysis · 0.2statistical anomaly detection · 0.2dynamic graph processing · 0.2organizational structuring · 0.0negotiation · 0.0case study · 0.0simulation · 0.0blackboard paradigm · 0.0OPS5 · 0.0selective abstraction · 0.0goal relationships · 0.0meta-level control · 0.0distributed problem solving · 0.0distributed artificial intelligence · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | Detecting insider threats in a real corporate database of computer usage activityabstractThis paper reports on methods and results of an applied research project by a team consisting of SAIC and four universities to develop, integrate, and evaluate new approaches to detect the weak signals characteristic of insider threats on organizations' information systems. Our system combines structural and semantic information from a real corporate database of monitored activity on their users' computers to detect independently developed red team inserts of malicious insider activities. We have developed and applied multiple algorithms for anomaly detection based on suspected scenarios of malicious insider behavior, indicators of unusual activities, high-dimensional statistical patterns, temporal sequences, and normal graph evolution. Algorithms and representations for dynamic graph processing provide the ability to scale as needed for enterprise-level deployments on real-time data streams. We have also developed a visual language for specifying combinations of features, baselines, peer groups, time periods, and algorithms to detect anomalies suggestive of instances of insider threat behavior. We defined over 100 data features in seven categories based on approximately 5.5 million actions per day from approximately 5,500 users. We have achieved area under the ROC curve values of up to 0.979 and lift values of 65 on the top 50 user-days identified on two months of real data. Ted E. Senator, Henry G. Goldberg, Alex Memory, William T. Young, Bradley Rees, Robert Pierce, Daniel Huang 0003, Matthew Reardon, David A. Bader, Edmond Chow, Irfan A. Essa, Joshua Jones, Vinay Bettadapura, Polo Chau, Oded Green, Oguz Kaya, Anita Zakrzewska, Erica Briscoe, Rudolph Louis Mappus IV, Robert McColl, Lora Weiss, Thomas G. Dietterich, Alan Fern, Weng-Keen Wong, Shubhomoy Das, Andrew Emmott, Jed Irvine, Jay-Yoon Lee, Danai Koutra, Christos Faloutsos, Daniel D. Corkill, Lisa Friedland, Amanda Gentzel, David D. Jensen |
KDD | 31 |
| 2012 | An Ensemble Architecture for Learning Complex Problem-Solving Techniques from DemonstrationabstractWe present a novel ensemble architecture for learning problem-solving techniques from a very small number of expert solutions and demonstrate its effectiveness in a complex real-world domain. The key feature of our “Generalized Integrated Learning Architecture” (GILA) is a set of heterogeneous independent learning and reasoning (ILR) components, coordinated by a central meta-reasoning executive (MRE). The ILRs are weakly coupled in the sense that all coordination during learning and performance happens through the MRE. Each ILR learns independently from a small number of expert demonstrations of a complex task. During performance, each ILR proposes partial solutions to subproblems posed by the MRE, which are then selected from and pieced together by the MRE to produce a complete solution. The heterogeneity of the learner-reasoners allows both learning and problem solving to be more effective because their abilities and biases are complementary and synergistic. We describe the application of this novel learning and problem solving architecture to the domain of airspace management, where multiple requests for the use of airspaces need to be deconflicted, reconciled, and managed automatically. Formal evaluations show that our system performs as well as or better than humans after learning from the same training data. Furthermore, GILA outperforms any individual ILR run in isolation, thus demonstrating the power of the ensemble architecture for learning and problem solving. Xiaoqin Zhang 0001, Bhavesh Shrestha, Subbarao Kambhampati, Phillip DiBona, Jinhong K. Guo, Daniel McFarlane, Martin O. Hofmann, Kenneth R. Whitebread, Darren Scott Appling, Elizabeth T. Whitaker, Ethan Trewhitt, Li Ding 0001, James Michaelis, Deborah L. McGuinness, James A. Hendler, Janardhan Rao Doppa, Thomas G. Dietterich, Prasad Tadepalli, Weng-Keen Wong, Derek T. Green, Antons Rebguns, Diana F. Spears, Ugur Kuter, Geoffrey Levine, Gerald DeJong, Reid MacTavish, Santiago Ontañón, Jainarayan Radhakrishnan, Ashwin Ram 0001, Hala Mostafa, Huzaifa Zafar, Chongjie Zhang, Daniel D. Corkill, Victor R. Lesser, Zhexuan Song |
ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. | 35 |
| 2011 | Deploying Power-Aware, Wireless Sensor AgentsabstractDeveloping sensor agents that can be deployed untethered in the field presents significant challenges in adapting to hardware, communication, power and environmental limitations. Real-world characteristics dictate agent behavior and operating strategies, sometimes quite differently from often held assumptions and intuitions. In this article, we describe the sensor-agent hardware and blackboard-system software used in CNAS (collaborative network for atmospheric sensing), an agent-based, power-aware sensor network for ground-level atmospheric monitoring. CNAS is representative of a class of battery-powered, wireless sensor networks in which the distance separating deployed sensor agents is near the limit of their WiFi communication range. To conserve battery power, CNAS sensor agents must have their wireless radios turned off most of the time, as even having them turned on consumes significant power. This limitation complicates agent interaction and network responsiveness, because an agent cannot simply turn on its radio when it needs to send a message. CNAS agents also must have their radios turned on when others are sending messages to them and to support multi-hop message forwarding. We discuss how CNAS agents collaborate using only periodic radio availability and consider how different hardware and communication capabilities would change CNAS strategies. We also relate challenges that had to be addressed during deployments of CNAS at military exercises held in the summer heat in Wisconsin and in the rain and mud in Queensland, Australia. We conclude with research on improving CNAS responsiveness with limited radio availability and on potential next-generation CNAS hardware. Daniel D. Corkill |
Comput. J. | 1 |
| 2010 | Reducing Online Model-Development Time by Agents Using Constraints Between Shared ObservationsabstractA situated agent must determine aspects of its environment in order to make appropriate decisions. This determination must be done quickly, as performance can suffer until each agent develops a sufficiently accurate model of its environment. We introduce a two-phase model-development approach called pre-deployment learning and situated model-development in agents (PLASMA) that leads to a significant reduction in the online (post-deployment) time required to determine environmental models. During the pre-deployment phase, an incompletely specified, site-independent model of an agent's environment is developed, with the site-dependent features represented as parameters in the model. This pre-deployment model is then completed during the post-deployment phase by determining the model parameters using constraints between local and shared observations. In this article, we use the PLASMA approach in developing an environmental model for potential solar visibility and panel collection characteristics by each agent in a power-aware wireless sensor network. We show that, by using temporal and spatial constraints between shared observations, agents can reduce online model-development time by as much as 80% relative to a standard multi-agent reinforcement learning algorithm. Furthermore, we show that using constraints between shared observations can further reduce post-deployment parameter determination time by as much as 67% relative to sharing only local variable values in a distributed variable satisfaction post-deployment technique. In all but the most unlikely of environmental conditions, using the PLASMA-based approach allows individual agent-harvesting models to be completed using only the first and second day observations when compared with 10 days of observations required by the power management algorithm of Kansal et al. Huzaifa Zafar, Daniel D. Corkill |
Comput. J. | 2 |
| 2009 | An Ensemble Learning and Problem Solving Architecture for Airspace Management
Xiaoqin Zhang 0001, Phillip DiBona, Darren Scott Appling, Li Ding 0001, Janardhan Rao Doppa, Derek T. Green, Jinhong K. Guo, Ugur Kuter, Geoffrey Levine, Reid MacTavish, Daniel McFarlane, James Michaelis, Hala Mostafa, Santiago Ontañón, Jainarayan Radhakrishnan, Antons Rebguns, Bhavesh Shrestha, Zhexuan Song, Ethan Trewhitt, Huzaifa Zafar, Chongjie Zhang, Daniel D. Corkill, Gerald DeJong, Thomas G. Dietterich, Subbarao Kambhampati, Victor R. Lesser, Deborah L. McGuinness, Ashwin Ram 0001, Diana F. Spears, Prasad Tadepalli, Elizabeth T. Whitaker, Weng-Keen Wong, James A. Hendler, Martin O. Hofmann, Kenneth R. Whitebread |
IAAI | 24 |
| 2008 | Automated organization design for multi-agent systems
Mark Sims, Daniel D. Corkill, Victor R. Lesser |
Auton. Agents Multi Agent Syst. | 2 |
| 1991 | Embedable Problem-Solving Architectures: A Study of Integrating OPS5 with UMass GBBabstractThe requirements of a problem-solving architecture that can be tightly embedded within other architectures and coexist with multiple instances of itself and of other problem-solvers are discussed. The additional effort needed to produce an embedable problem-solving architecture is minor compared to the substantial increase in applicability of the architecture. A specific need for embedable problem-solvers arose with the University of Massachusetts Generic Blackboard Framework (UMass GBB). UMass GBB is based on the blackboard paradigm, which naturally integrates heterogeneous problem-solving representations as individual knowledge sources (KSs). This need is met by developing general specifications for embedable problem-solving architectures, and the specifications are used to modify the public-domain version of OPS5 in order to embed it as an integral KS language within UMass GBB. The OPS5 modifications result in an easily integrated GBB KS language (distributed with the UMass GBB system) that has been used in several GBB applications.> Daniel D. Corkill |
IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. | 1 |
| 1989 | Focus of Control Through Goal Relationships
Victor R. Lesser, Daniel D. Corkill, Robert Whitehair, J. A. Hernandez |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 1989 | Trends in Cooperative Distributed Problem SolvingabstractThe authors present an overview of cooperative distributed problem solving (CDPS), an emerging research area that combines aspects of AI (artificial intelligence) and distributed processing. CDPS can be used to study how a loosely coupled network of sophisticated problem-solving nodes can solve a complex problem which consists of a set of interdependent subproblems. Subproblems arise because of spatial, temporal, and functional distribution of data, knowledge, and processing capabilities. Application areas include distributed interpretation, distributed planning and control, cooperating expert systems, and computer-supported human cooperation. The authors survey the important approaches and empirical investigations that have been developed. The approaches covered include negotiation, functionally accurate cooperation, organizational structuring, multiagent planning, sophisticated local control, and theoretical frameworks.> Edmund H. Durfee, Victor R. Lesser, Daniel D. Corkill |
IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. | 3 |
| 1988 | Tuning a Blackboard-Based Application: A Case Study Using GBB
Daniel D. Corkill, Kevin Q. Gallagher |
AAAI | 1 |
| 1987 | Achieving Flexibility, Efficiency, and Generality in Blackboard Architectures
Daniel D. Corkill, Kevin Q. Gallagher, Philip M. Johnson |
AAAI | 1 |
| 1987 | Coherent Cooperation Among Communicating Problem SolversabstractWhen two or more computing agents work on interacting tasks, their activities should be coordinated so that they cooperate coherently. Coherence is particularly problematic in domains where each agent has only a limited view of the overall task, where communication between agents is limited, and where there is no ``controller'' to coordinate the agents. Our approach to coherent cooperation in such domains is developed in the context of a distributed problem-solving network where agents cooperate to solve a single problem. The approach stresses the importance of sophisticated local control by which each problem-solving node integrates knowledge of the problem domain with (meta-level) knowledge about network coordination. This allows nodes to make rapid, intelligent local decisions based on changing problem characteristics with only a limited amount of intercommunication to coordinate these decisions. We describe three mechanisms that improve network coherence: 1) an organizational structure that provides a long-term framework for network coordination to guide each node's local control decisions; 2) a planner at each node that develops sequences of problem-solving activities based on the current situation; and 3) meta-level communication about the current state of local problem solving that enables nodes to dynamically refine the organization. We present a variety of problem-solving situations to show the benefits and limitations of these mechanisms, and we provide simulation results showing the mechanisms to be particularly cost effective in more complex problem-solving situations. We also discuss how these mechanisms might be of more general use in other distributed computing applications. Edmund H. Durfee, Victor R. Lesser, Daniel D. Corkill |
IEEE Trans. Computers | 3 |
| 1986 | GBB: A Generic Blackboard Development System
Daniel D. Corkill, Kevin Q. Gallagher, Kelly Murray |
AAAI | 1 |
| 1985 | Increasing Coherence in a Distributed Problem-Solving Network
Edmund H. Durfee, Victor R. Lesser, Daniel D. Corkill |
IJCAI | 3 |
| 1984 | Selective Abstraction of AI System Activity
Jasmina Pavlin, Daniel D. Corkill |
AAAI | 2 |
| 1983 | The Use of Meta-Level Control for Coordination in a Distributed Problem Solving Network
Daniel D. Corkill, Victor R. Lesser |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 1982 | Unifying Data-Directed and Goal-Directed Control: An Example and Experiments
Daniel D. Corkill, Victor R. Lesser, Eva Hudlicka |
AAAI | 1 |
| 1982 | A High-Level simulation Testbed for cooperative distributed problem solving
Victor R. Lesser, Daniel D. Corkill, Jasmina Pavlin, Lawrence S. Lefkowitz, Eva Hudlicka, R. Brooks, S. Reed |
ICDCS | 2 |
| 1981 | Functionally Accurate, Cooperative Distributed SystemsabstractA new approach for structuring distributed processing systems, called functionally accurate, cooperative (FA/C), is proposed. The approach differs from conventional ones in its emphasis on handling distribution-caused uncertainty and errors as an integral part of the network problem-solving process. In this approach nodes cooperatively problem-solve by exchanging partial tentative results (at various levels of abstraction) within the context of common goals. The approach is especially suited to applications in which the data necessary to achieve a solution cannot be partitioned in such a way that a node can complete a task without seeing the intermediate state of task processing at other nodes. Much of the inspiration for the FA/C approach comes from the mechanisms used in knowledge-based artificial intelligence (Al) systems for resolving uncertainty caused by noisy input data and the use of approximate knowledge. The appropriateness of the FA/C approach is explored in three application domains: distributed interpretation, distributed network traffic-light control, and distributed planning. Additionally, the relationship between the approach and the structure of management organizations is developed. Finally, a number of current research directions necessary to more fully develop the FA/C approach are outlined. These research directions include distributed search, the integration of implicit and explicit forms of control, and distributed planning and organizational self-design. Victor R. Lesser, Daniel D. Corkill |
IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. | 2 |
| 1979 | Hierarchical Planning in a Distributed Environment
Daniel D. Corkill |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 1979 | The Application of Artificial Intelligence Techniques to Cooperative Distributed Processing
Victor R. Lesser, Daniel D. Corkill |
IJCAI | 2 |