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

Guanyan Li

dblp:315/4682 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-4163-1840ORCID · corroborated

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Program verification · 54% Program analysis · 23% Programming languages and type systems · 23%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Automated reasoning and model checking · 40% Automata and formal languages · 40% Logic in computer science · 20%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 100%

Topics — the 11 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program verification
abstraction refinement
0.912025
Structural Abstraction and Refinement for Probabilistic Programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025
Program verification › probabilistic verification
probabilistic program verification
0.912025
Structural Abstraction and Refinement for Probabilistic Programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic programming
bayesian programming
0.812024
Static Posterior Inference of Bayesian Probabilistic Programming via Polynomial Solving · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2024
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
posterior inference
0.812024
Static Posterior Inference of Bayesian Probabilistic Programming via Polynomial Solving · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2024
Programming languages and type systems › probabilistic programming
exact inference
0.812024
Static Posterior Inference of Bayesian Probabilistic Programming via Polynomial Solving · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2024
Program analysis › static analysis
probabilistic program analysis
0.812024
Static Posterior Inference of Bayesian Probabilistic Programming via Polynomial Solving · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2024
Logic in computer science › rewriting › recursion schemes
higher-order recursion schemes
0.612022
Probabilistic Verification Beyond Context-Freeness · LICS 2022
Automated reasoning and model checking › model checking
probabilistic model checking
0.612022
Probabilistic Verification Beyond Context-Freeness · LICS 2022
Automata and formal languages › pushdown automata
probabilistic pushdown automata
0.612022
Probabilistic Verification Beyond Context-Freeness · LICS 2022
Automated reasoning and model checking
program verification
0.612022
Probabilistic Verification Beyond Context-Freeness · LICS 2022
Automata and formal languages
pushdown automata
0.612022
Probabilistic Verification Beyond Context-Freeness · LICS 2022

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

polynomial solving · 1.5optional stopping theorem · 1.5fixed-point theorem · 1.5probabilistic verification · 0.6linear-time model checking · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Structural Abstraction and Refinement for Probabilistic Programs
abstract
In this paper, we present structural abstraction refinement, a novel framework for verifying the threshold problem of probabilistic programs. Our approach represents the structure of a Probabilistic Control-Flow Automaton (PCFA) as a Markov Decision Process (MDP) by abstracting away statement semantics. The maximum reachability of the MDP naturally provides a proper upper bound of the violation probability, termed the structural upper bound . This introduces a fresh “structural” characterization of the relationship between PCFA and MDP, contrasting with the traditional “semantical” view, where the MDP reflects semantics. The method uniquely features a clean separation of concerns between probability and computational semantics that the abstraction focuses solely on probabilistic computation and the refinement handles only the semantics aspect, where the latter allows non-random program verification techniques to be employed without modification. Building upon this feature, we propose a general counterexample-guided abstraction refinement (CEGAR) framework, capable of leveraging established non-probabilistic techniques for probabilistic verification. We explore its instantiations using trace abstraction. Our method was evaluated on a diverse set of examples against state-of-the-art tools, and the experimental results highlight its versatility and ability to handle more flexible structures swiftly.
Guanyan Li, Juanen Li, Zhilei Han, Hongfei Fu 0001, Fei He 0001
Proc. ACM Program. Lang.1
2024 Static Posterior Inference of Bayesian Probabilistic Programming via Polynomial Solving
abstract
In Bayesian probabilistic programming, a central problem is to estimate the normalised posterior distribution (NPD) of a probabilistic program with conditioning via score (a.k.a. observe ) statements. Most previous approaches address this problem by Markov Chain Monte Carlo and variational inference, and therefore could not generate guaranteed outcomes within a finite time limit. Moreover, existing methods for exact inference either impose syntactic restrictions or cannot guarantee successful inference in general. In this work, we propose a novel automated approach to derive guaranteed bounds for NPD via polynomial solving. We first establish a fixed-point theorem for the wide class of score-at-end Bayesian probabilistic programs that terminate almost-surely and have a single bounded score statement at program termination. Then, we propose a multiplicative variant of Optional Stopping Theorem (OST) to address score-recursive Bayesian programs where score statements with weights greater than one could appear inside a loop. Bayesian nonparametric models, enjoying a renaissance in statistics and machine learning, can be represented by score-recursive Bayesian programs and are difficult to handle due to an integrability issue. Finally, we use polynomial solving to implement our fixed-point theorem and OST variant. To improve the accuracy of the polynomial solving, we further propose a truncation operation and the synthesis of multiple bounds over various program inputs. Our approach can handle Bayesian probabilistic programs with unbounded while loops and continuous distributions with infinite supports. Experiments over a wide range of benchmarks show that compared with the most relevant approach (Beutner et al. , PLDI 2022) for guaranteed NPD analysis via recursion unrolling, our approach is more time efficient and derives comparable or even tighter NPD bounds. Furthermore, our approach can handle score-recursive programs which previous approaches could not.
Tengshun Yang, Hongfei Fu 0001, Guanyan Li, C.-H. Luke Ong
Proc. ACM Program. Lang.4
2022 Probabilistic Verification Beyond Context-Freeness
abstract
Probabilistic pushdown automata (recursive state machines) are a widely known model of probabilistic computation associated with many decidable problems concerning termination (time) and linear-time model checking. Higher-order recursion schemes (HORS) are a prominent formalism for the analysis of higher-order computation.
Guanyan Li, Andrzej S. Murawski, C.-H. Luke Ong
LICS1