EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Shambwaditya Saha
dblp:165/2723
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 6 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 3 · 1 first-authorArtificial intelligence and machine learning · 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 |
Software testing · 44% Program synthesis and code generation · 25% Program verification · 19% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing
test generation |
0.9 | 2 | 2021 | Synthesizing contracts correct modulo a test generator · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2021 Learning stateful preconditions modulo a test generator · PLDI 2019 |
Program verification › annotation inference
precondition synthesis |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learning stateful preconditions modulo a test generator · PLDI 2019 |
Program analysis
specification mining |
0.3 | 2 | 2021 | Synthesizing contracts correct modulo a test generator · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2021 Learning stateful preconditions modulo a test generator · PLDI 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
tight contracts · 0.5online learning · 0.5test generation · 0.4learning · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Synthesizing contracts correct modulo a test generatorabstractWe present an approach to learn contracts for object-oriented programs where guarantees of correctness of the contracts are made with respect to a test generator. Our contract synthesis approach is based on a novel notion of tight contracts and an online learning algorithm that works in tandem with a test generator to synthesize tight contracts. We implement our approach in a tool called Precis and evaluate it on a suite of programs written in C#, studying the safety and strength of the synthesized contracts, and compare them to those synthesized by Daikon. Angello Astorga, Shambwaditya Saha, Ahmad Dinkins, Felicia Wang, P. Madhusudan, Tao Xie 0001 |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 2 |
| 2020 | A Learning-Based Approach to Synthesizing Invariants for Incomplete Verification EnginesabstractAbstract We propose a framework for synthesizing inductive invariants for incomplete verification engines, which soundly reduce logical problems in undecidable theories to decidable theories. Our framework is based on the counterexample guided inductive synthesis principle and allows verification engines to communicate non-provability information to guide invariant synthesis. We show precisely how the verification engine can compute such non-provability information and how to build effective learning algorithms when invariants are expressed as Boolean combinations of a fixed set of predicates. Moreover, we evaluate our framework in two verification settings, one in which verification engines need to handle quantified formulas and one in which verification engines have to reason about heap properties expressed in an expressive but undecidable separation logic. Our experiments show that our invariant synthesis framework based on non-provability information can both effectively synthesize inductive invariants and adequately strengthen contracts across a large suite of programs. This work is an extended version of a conference paper titled “Invariant Synthesis for Incomplete Verification Engines”. Daniel Neider, P. Madhusudan, Shambwaditya Saha, Pranav Garg 0001, Daejun Park 0001 |
J. Autom. Reason. | 3 |
| 2019 | Learning stateful preconditions modulo a test generatorabstractIn this paper, we present a novel learning framework for inferring stateful preconditions (i.e., preconditions constraining not only primitive-type inputs but also non-primitive-type object states) modulo a test generator, where the quality of the preconditions is based on their safety and maximality with respect to the test generator. We instantiate the learning framework with a specific learner and test generator to realize a precondition synthesis tool for C#. We use an extensive evaluation to show that the tool is highly effective in synthesizing preconditions for avoiding exceptions as well as synthesizing conditions under which methods commute. Angello Astorga, P. Madhusudan, Shambwaditya Saha, Tao Xie 0001 |
PLDI | 3 |
| 2019 | Sorcar: Property-Driven Algorithms for Learning Conjunctive Invariants
Daniel Neider, Shambwaditya Saha, Pranav Garg 0001, P. Madhusudan |
SAS | 2 |
| 2018 | A Decidable Fragment of Second Order Logic With Applications to SynthesisabstractWe propose a fragment of many-sorted second order logic called EQSMT and show that checking satisfiability of sentences in this fragment is decidable. EQSMT formulae have an $\exists^*\forall^*$ quantifier prefix (over variables, functions and relations) making EQSMT conducive for modeling synthesis problems. Moreover, EQSMT allows reasoning using a combination of background theories provided that they have a decidable satisfiability problem for the $\exists^*\forall^*$ FO-fragment (e.g., linear arithmetic). Our decision procedure reduces the satisfiability of EQSMT formulae to satisfiability queries of $\exists^*\forall^*$ formulae of each individual background theory, allowing us to use existing efficient SMT solvers supporting $\exists^*\forall^*$ reasoning for these theories; hence our procedure can be seen as effectively quantified SMT (EQSMT) reasoning. Errata: We have modified the transformation step-2 (page 9) to correct for a slight error. Also, the description above Theorem 10 is different from the published version. P. Madhusudan, Umang Mathur 0001, Shambwaditya Saha, Mahesh Viswanathan 0001 |
CSL | 3 |
| 2018 | Invariant Synthesis for Incomplete Verification Engines
Daniel Neider, Pranav Garg 0001, P. Madhusudan, Shambwaditya Saha, Daejun Park 0001 |
TACAS (1) | 4 |
| 2018 | Compositional Synthesis of Piece-Wise Functions by Learning ClassifiersabstractWe present a novel general technique that uses classifier learning to synthesize piece-wise functions (functions that split the domain into regions and apply simpler functions to each region) against logical synthesis specifications. Our framework works by combining a synthesizer of functions for fixed concrete inputs and a synthesizer of predicates that can be used to define regions. We develop a theory of single-point refutable specifications that facilitate generating concrete counterexamples using constraint solvers. We implement the framework for synthesizing piece-wise functions in linear integer arithmetic, combining leaf expression synthesis using constraint-solving with predicate synthesis using enumeration, and tie them together using a decision tree classifier. We demonstrate that this compositional approach is competitive compared to existing synthesis engines on a set of synthesis specifications. Daniel Neider, Shambwaditya Saha, P. Madhusudan |
ACM Trans. Comput. Log. | 2 |
| 2016 | Synthesizing Piece-Wise Functions by Learning Classifiers
Daniel Neider, Shambwaditya Saha, P. Madhusudan |
TACAS | 2 |
| 2015 | Alchemist: Learning Guarded Affine Functions
Shambwaditya Saha, Pranav Garg 0001, P. Madhusudan |
CAV (1) | 1 |