Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jan Corazza
dblp:324/0569
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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 |
Reinforcement learning · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reward design
reward machine |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Reinforcement Learning with Stochastic Reward Machines · AAAI 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reward design
reward shaping |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Reinforcement Learning with Stochastic Reward Machines · AAAI 2022 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
constraint solving |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Reinforcement Learning with Stochastic Reward Machines · AAAI 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
constraint solving · 1.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Accessible Smart Contracts Verification: Synthesizing Formal Models with Tamed LLMsabstractWhen blockchain systems are said to be trustless, what this really means is that all the trust is put into software. Thus, there are strong incentives to ensure blockchain software is correct–vulnerabilities here cost millions and break businesses. One of the most powerful ways of establishing software correctness is by using formal methods. Approaches based on formal methods, however, induce a significant overhead in terms of time and expertise required to successfully employ them. Our work addresses this critical disadvantage by automating the creation of a formal model–a mathematical abstraction of the software system–which is often a core task when employing formal methods. We perform model synthesis in three phases: we first transpile the code into model stubs; then we “fill in the blanks” using a large language model (LLM); finally, we iteratively repair the generated model, on both syntactical and semantical level. In this way, we significantly reduce the amount of time necessary to create formal models and increase accessibility of valuable software verification methods that rely on them. The practical context of our work was reducing the time-to-value of using formal models for correctness audits of smart contracts. Jan Corazza, Ivan Gavran, Gabriela Moreira, Daniel Neider |
ICST | 1 |
| 2025 | Decentralizing Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning with Temporal Causal Information
Jan Corazza, Hadi Partovi Aria, Hyohun Kim, Daniel Neider, Zhe Xu 0005 |
ECML/PKDD (6) | 1 |
| 2022 | Reinforcement Learning with Stochastic Reward MachinesabstractReward machines are an established tool for dealing with reinforcement learning problems in which rewards are sparse and depend on complex sequences of actions. However, existing algorithms for learning reward machines assume an overly idealized setting where rewards have to be free of noise. To overcome this practical limitation, we introduce a novel type of reward machines, called stochastic reward machines, and an algorithm for learning them. Our algorithm, based on constraint solving, learns minimal stochastic reward machines from the explorations of a reinforcement learning agent. This algorithm can easily be paired with existing reinforcement learning algorithms for reward machines and guarantees to converge to an optimal policy in the limit. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our algorithm in two case studies and show that it outperforms both existing methods and a naive approach for handling noisy reward functions. Jan Corazza, Ivan Gavran, Daniel Neider |
AAAI | 1 |