Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Marco Casadio
dblp:158/5741
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0009-0001-7675-0743ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author · 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.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Program verification · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
adversarial robustness |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case Study · CAV (1) 2022 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case Study · CAV (1) 2022 |
Program verification
neural network verification |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case Study · CAV (1) 2022 |
Program verification › neural network verification
robustness verification |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case Study · CAV (1) 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
verification · 1.1empirical evaluation · 1.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case StudyabstractAbstract Neural networks are very successful at detecting patterns in noisy data, and have become the technology of choice in many fields. However, their usefulness is hampered by their susceptibility to adversarial attacks . Recently, many methods for measuring and improving a network’s robustness to adversarial perturbations have been proposed, and this growing body of research has given rise to numerous explicit or implicit notions of robustness. Connections between these notions are often subtle, and a systematic comparison between them is missing in the literature. In this paper we begin addressing this gap, by setting up general principles for the empirical analysis and evaluation of a network’s robustness as a mathematical property—during the network’s training phase, its verification, and after its deployment. We then apply these principles and conduct a case study that showcases the practical benefits of our general approach. Marco Casadio, Ekaterina Komendantskaya, Matthew L. Daggitt, Wen Kokke, Guy Katz, Guy Amir, Idan Refaeli |
CAV (1) | 1 |