Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Andrei Paskevich
dblp:118/8430 · also Andrey Paskevich
· DBLP profile ↗
14ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 9 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Theory of computation · 5 · 1 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 1 first-author
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 |
Program verification · 76% Programming languages and type systems · 24% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Logic in computer science · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program verification
deductive verification |
0.6 | 2 | 2020 | Deductive verification with ghost monitors · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020 The Spirit of Ghost Code · CAV 2014 |
Program verification
program logic |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Deductive verification with ghost monitors · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020 |
Programming languages and type systems › type systems
soundness |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Deductive verification with ghost monitors · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020 |
Program verification › program logic
ghost code |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | The Spirit of Ghost Code · CAV 2014 |
Logic in computer science
program logic |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | The Spirit of Ghost Code · CAV 2014 |
Program verification
relational property |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Deductive verification with ghost monitors · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
transfinite games · 0.4ghost code · 0.4formalisation · 0.4separation logic · 0.4deductive verification · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | coma, an Intermediate Verification Language with Explicit Abstraction BarriersabstractInternational audience Andrei Paskevich, Paul Patault, Jean-Christophe Filliâtre |
ESOP (2) | 1 |
| 2025 | When Separation Arithmetic is Enough
Jean-Christophe Filliâtre, Andrei Paskevich, Olivier Danvy |
iFM | 2 |
| 2020 | Verification of Programs with Pointers in SPARK
Georges-Axel Jaloyan, Claire Dross, Maroua Maalej, Yannick Moy, Andrei Paskevich |
ICFEM | 5 |
| 2020 | Abstraction and Genericity in Why3
Jean-Christophe Filliâtre, Andrei Paskevich |
ISoLA (1) | 2 |
| 2020 | Deductive verification with ghost monitorsabstractWe present a new approach to deductive program verification based on auxiliary programs called ghost monitors . This technique is useful when the syntactic structure of the target program is not well suited for verification, for example, when an essentially recursive algorithm is implemented in an iterative fashion. Our approach consists in implementing, specifying, and verifying an auxiliary program that monitors the execution of the target program, in such a way that the correctness of the monitor entails the correctness of the target. The ghost monitor maintains the necessary data and invariants to facilitate the proof. It can be implemented and verified in any suitable framework, which does not have to be related to the language of the target programs. This technique is also applicable when we want to establish relational properties between two target programs written in different languages and having different syntactic structure. We then show how ghost monitors can be used to specify and prove fine-grained properties about the infinite behaviors of target programs. Since this cannot be easily done using existing verification frameworks, we introduce a dedicated language for ghost monitors, with an original construction to catch and handle divergent executions. The soundness of the underlying program logic is established using a particular flavor of transfinite games. This language and its soundness are formalized and mechanically checked. Martin Clochard, Claude Marché, Andrei Paskevich |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 3 |
| 2016 | The spirit of ghost code
Jean-Christophe Filliâtre, Léon Gondelman, Andrei Paskevich |
Formal Methods Syst. Des. | 3 |
| 2016 | Adding Decision Procedures to SMT Solvers Using Axioms with Triggers
Claire Dross, Sylvain Conchon, Johannes Kanig, Andrei Paskevich |
J. Autom. Reason. | 4 |
| 2015 | Let's verify this with Why3
François Bobot, Jean-Christophe Filliâtre, Claude Marché, Andrei Paskevich |
Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. | 4 |
| 2014 | The Spirit of Ghost Code
Jean-Christophe Filliâtre, Léon Gondelman, Andrei Paskevich |
CAV | 3 |
| 2013 | TFF1: The TPTP Typed First-Order Form with Rank-1 Polymorphism
Jasmin Blanchette, Andrei Paskevich |
CADE | 2 |
| 2013 | Why3 - Where Programs Meet Provers
Jean-Christophe Filliâtre, Andrei Paskevich |
ESOP | 2 |
| 2010 | A3PAT, an approach for certified automated termination proofsabstractSoftware engineering, automated reasoning, rule-based programming or specifications often use rewriting systems for which termination, among other properties, may have to be ensured.This paper presents the approach developed in Project A3PAT to discover and moreover certify, with full automation, termination proofs for term rewriting systems. Evelyne Contejean, Andrei Paskevich, Xavier Urbain, Pierre Courtieu, Olivier Pons, Julien Forest |
PEPM | 2 |
| 2008 | Connection Tableaux with Lazy Paramodulation
Andrei Paskevich |
J. Autom. Reason. | 1 |
| 2007 | System for Automated Deduction (SAD): A Tool for Proof Verification
Konstantin Verchinine, Alexander V. Lyaletski, Andrei Paskevich |
CADE | 3 |