Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Davide Italiano
dblp:266/9167
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0008-2283-5080ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 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 |
Debugging and program repair · 56% Compilers and program optimization · 44% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Debugging and program repair › software debugging
debug information |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Who's debugging the debuggers? exposing debug information bugs in optimized binaries · ASPLOS 2021 |
Debugging and program repair › software debugging
debugging optimized code |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Debug information validation for optimized code · PLDI 2020 |
Compilers and program optimization
optimizing compiler |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Debug information validation for optimized code · PLDI 2020 |
Debugging and program repair
post-deployment debugging |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Who's debugging the debuggers? exposing debug information bugs in optimized binaries · ASPLOS 2021 |
Debugging and program repair › software debugging
post-mortem debugging |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Debug information validation for optimized code · PLDI 2020 |
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Finding Missed Code Size Optimizations in Compilers using Large Language ModelsabstractCompilers are complex, and significant effort has been expended on testing them. Techniques such as random program generation and differential testing have proved highly effective and have uncovered thousands of bugs in production compilers. The majority of effort has been expended on validating that a compiler produces correct code for a given input, while less attention has been paid to ensuring that the compiler produces performant code. In this work we adapt differential testing to the task of identifying missed optimization opportunities in compilers. We develop a novel testing approach which combines large language models (LLMs) with a series of differential testing strategies and use them to find missing code size optimizations in C / C++ compilers. The advantage of our approach is its simplicity. We offload the complex task of generating random code to an off-the-shelf LLM, and use heuristics and analyses to identify anomalous compiler behavior. Our approach requires fewer than 150 lines of code to implement. This simplicity makes it extensible. By simply changing the target compiler and initial LLM prompt we port the approach from C / C++ to Rust and Swift, finding bugs in both. To date we have reported 24 confirmed bugs in production compilers, and conclude that LLM-assisted testing is a promising avenue for detecting optimization bugs in real world compilers. Davide Italiano, Chris Cummins |
CC | 1 |
| 2021 | Who's debugging the debuggers? exposing debug information bugs in optimized binariesabstractDespite the advancements in software testing, bugs still plague deployed software and result in crashes in production. When debugging issues —sometimes caused by “heisenbugs”— there is the need to interpret core dumps and reproduce the issue offline on the same binary deployed. This requires the entire toolchain (compiler, linker, debugger) to correctly generate and use debug information. Little attention has been devoted to checking that such information is correctly preserved by modern toolchains’ optimization stages. This is particularly important as managing debug information in optimized production binaries is non-trivial, often leading to toolchain bugs that may hinder post-deployment debugging efforts. Giuseppe Antonio Di Luna, Davide Italiano, Luca Massarelli, Sebastian Österlund, Cristiano Giuffrida, Leonardo Querzoni |
ASPLOS | 2 |
| 2020 | Debug information validation for optimized codeabstractAlmost all modern production software is compiled with optimization. Debugging optimized code is a desirable functionality. For example, developers usually perform post-mortem debugging on the coredumps produced by software crashes. Designing reliable debugging techniques for optimized code has been well-studied in the past. However, little is known about the correctness of the debug information generated by optimizing compilers when debugging optimized code. Qirun Zhang, Davide Italiano |
PLDI | 4 |