Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Gabriel Grand

dblp:215/3760 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
8ranked-venue papers
2as first author
8since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0003-1920-0021ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 7 · 2 first-author · 7 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 4 · 1 first-author · 4 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Program synthesis and code generation · 89% Software maintenance and evolution · 11%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 61% Language models and text generation · 39%

Topics — the 8 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program synthesis and code generation › inductive program synthesis
library learning
1.422024
LILO: Learning Interpretable Libraries by Compressing and Documenting Code · ICLR 2024
Top-Down Synthesis for Library Learning · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2023
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
probabilistic inference
0.912025
Syntactic and Semantic Control of Large Language Models via Sequential Monte Carlo · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
sequential monte carlo
0.912025
Syntactic and Semantic Control of Large Language Models via Sequential Monte Carlo · ICLR 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
text generation
0.912025
Syntactic and Semantic Control of Large Language Models via Sequential Monte Carlo · ICLR 2025
Program synthesis and code generation › neural program synthesis
LLM-based program synthesis
0.812024
LILO: Learning Interpretable Libraries by Compressing and Documenting Code · ICLR 2024
Program synthesis and code generation › neural program synthesis
neurosymbolic program synthesis
0.812024
LILO: Learning Interpretable Libraries by Compressing and Documenting Code · ICLR 2024
Software maintenance and evolution › refactoring
automated refactoring
0.212024
LILO: Learning Interpretable Libraries by Compressing and Documenting Code · ICLR 2024
Software maintenance and evolution
refactoring
0.212024
LILO: Learning Interpretable Libraries by Compressing and Documenting Code · ICLR 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

sequential monte carlo · 0.9probabilistic conditioning · 0.9symbolic compression · 0.8large language model · 0.8auto-documentation · 0.8syntactic pattern matching · 0.7search space pruning · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Syntactic and Semantic Control of Large Language Models via Sequential Monte Carlo
abstract
A wide range of LM applications require generating text that conforms to syntactic or semantic constraints. Imposing such constraints can be naturally framed as _probabilistic conditioning_, but exact generation from the resulting distribution—which can differ substantially from the LM’s base distribution—is generally intractable. In this work, we develop an architecture for controlled LM generation based on sequential Monte Carlo (SMC). Our SMC framework allows us to flexibly incorporate domain- and problem-specific constraints at inference time, and efficiently reallocate computational resources in light of new information during the course of generation. By comparing to a number of alternatives and ablations on four challenging domains---Python code generation for data science, text-to-SQL, goal inference, and molecule synthesis—we demonstrate that, with little overhead, our approach allows small open-source language models to outperform models over 8$\times$ larger, as well as closed-source, fine-tuned ones. In support of the probabilistic perspective, we show that these performance improvements are driven by better approximation to the posterior distribution. [Our system](https://github.com/probcomp/genlm-control) builds on the framework of Lew et al. (2023) and integrates with its _language model probabilistic programming language_, giving users a simple, programmable way to apply SMC to a broad variety of controlled generation problems.
João Loula, Benjamin LeBrun, Benjamin Lipkin, Clemente Pasti, Gabriel Grand, Tianyu Liu 0004, Yahya Emara, Marjorie Freedman, Jason Eisner, Ryan Cotterell, Vikash Mansinghka 0001, Alexander K. Lew, Tim Vieira, Timothy J. O'Donnell
ICLR6
2025 Elements of World Knowledge (EWoK): A Cognition-Inspired Framework for Evaluating Basic World Knowledge in Language Models
Anna A. Ivanova, Aalok Sathe, Benjamin Lipkin, Unnathi U. Kumar, Setayesh Radkani, Thomas Hikaru Clark, Carina Kauf, Jennifer Hu 0001, R. T. Pramod, Gabriel Grand, Vivian C. Paulun, Maria Ryskina, Ekin Akyürek, Ethan Wilcox, Nafisa Rashid, Leshem Choshen, Roger Levy, Evelina Fedorenko, Josh Tenenbaum, Jacob Andreas
Trans. Assoc. Comput. Linguistics10
2024 Loose LIPS Sink Ships: Asking Questions in Battleship with Language-Informed Program Sampling
Gabriel Grand, Valerio Pepe, Jacob Andreas, Josh Tenenbaum
CogSci1
2024 LILO: Learning Interpretable Libraries by Compressing and Documenting Code
abstract
While large language models (LLMs) now excel at code generation, a key aspect of software development is the art of refactoring: consolidating code into libraries of reusable and readable programs. In this paper, we introduce LILO, a neurosymbolic framework that iteratively synthesizes, compresses, and documents code to build libraries tailored to particular problem domains. LILO combines LLM-guided program synthesis with recent algorithmic advances in automated refactoring from Stitch: a symbolic compression system that efficiently identifies optimal lambda abstractions across large code corpora. To make these abstractions interpretable, we introduce an auto-documentation (AutoDoc) procedure that infers natural language names and docstrings based on contextual examples of usage. In addition to improving human readability, we find that AutoDoc boosts performance by helping LILO's synthesizer to interpret and deploy learned abstractions. We evaluate LILO on three inductive program synthesis benchmarks for string editing, scene reasoning, and graphics composition. Compared to existing neural and symbolic methods—including the state-of-the-art library learning algorithm DreamCoder—LILO solves more complex tasks and learns richer libraries that are grounded in linguistic knowledge.
Gabriel Grand, Lionel Wong, Matthew Bowers, Theo X. Olausson, Muxin Liu, Josh Tenenbaum, Jacob Andreas
ICLR1
2023 Evaluating statistical language models as pragmatic reasoners
Benjamin Lipkin, Lionel Wong, Gabriel Grand, Josh Tenenbaum
CogSci3
2023 Grounded physical language understanding with probabilistic programs and simulated worlds
Cedegao E. Zhang, Lionel Wong, Gabriel Grand, Josh Tenenbaum
CogSci3
2023 Top-Down Synthesis for Library Learning
abstract
This paper introduces corpus-guided top-down synthesis as a mechanism for synthesizing library functions that capture common functionality from a corpus of programs in a domain specific language (DSL). The algorithm builds abstractions directly from initial DSL primitives, using syntactic pattern matching of intermediate abstractions to intelligently prune the search space and guide the algorithm towards abstractions that maximally capture shared structures in the corpus. We present an implementation of the approach in a tool called Stitch and evaluate it against the state-of-the-art deductive library learning algorithm from DreamCoder. Our evaluation shows that Stitch is 3-4 orders of magnitude faster and uses 2 orders of magnitude less memory while maintaining comparable or better library quality (as measured by compressivity). We also demonstrate Stitch’s scalability on corpora containing hundreds of complex programs that are intractable with prior deductive approaches and show empirically that it is robust to terminating the search procedure early—further allowing it to scale to challenging datasets by means of early stopping.
Matthew Bowers, Theo X. Olausson, Lionel Wong, Gabriel Grand, Josh Tenenbaum, Kevin Ellis, Armando Solar-Lezama
Proc. ACM Program. Lang.4
2022 Identifying concept libraries from language about object structure
Catherine Wong, William P. McCarthy, Gabriel Grand, Yoni Friedman, Josh Tenenbaum, Jacob Andreas, Robert D. Hawkins, Judith E. Fan
CogSci3