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

Ardi Madadi

dblp:334/7917 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0001-9258-4872ORCID · corroborated

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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
Software testing · 38% Program synthesis and code generation · 25% Program analysis · 19%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Program synthesis and code generation
code generation with language models
1.012026
Incoherence as Oracle-less Measure of Error in LLM-Based Code Generation · AAAI 2026
Software testing › mutation testing
equivalent mutant detection
0.812024
Equivalent Mutants in the Wild: Identifying and Efficiently Suppressing Equivalent Mutants for Java Programs · ISSTA 2024
Software testing
mutation testing
0.812024
Equivalent Mutants in the Wild: Identifying and Efficiently Suppressing Equivalent Mutants for Java Programs · ISSTA 2024
Programming languages and type systems › control structures
pattern matching
0.812024
Equivalent Mutants in the Wild: Identifying and Efficiently Suppressing Equivalent Mutants for Java Programs · ISSTA 2024
Program analysis
static analysis
0.812024
Equivalent Mutants in the Wild: Identifying and Efficiently Suppressing Equivalent Mutants for Java Programs · ISSTA 2024

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

large language model · 1.0pattern matching · 0.8compiler equivalence checking · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Incoherence as Oracle-less Measure of Error in LLM-Based Code Generation
abstract
Generating code from a natural language programming task is one of the most successful applications of Large Language Models (LLMs). Yet, the generated program may be buggy. Without an oracle, such as an existing, correct implementation or a formal specification, can we somehow estimate how likely the generated program is correct? In this paper, we propose a measure of incorrectness, called incoherence, that can be estimated efficiently in the absence of an oracle and allows us to establish a lower bound on the error, i.e., the probability that the LLM-generated program for that specification is incorrect. In our experiments, our incoherence-based methodology can automatically identify about two-thirds of incorrect programs without reports of false positives for the average task. In fact, an oracle-based evaluation of LLMs can be reliably replaced by an incoherence-based evaluation. In particular, we find a very strong agreement between the ranking of LLMs by the number of programs deemed correct via an oracle (pass@1) and the ranking of LLMs by the number of programs deemed correct via incoherence.
Thomas Jean-Michel Valentin, Ardi Madadi, Gaetano Sapia, Marcel Böhme
AAAI2
2024 Equivalent Mutants in the Wild: Identifying and Efficiently Suppressing Equivalent Mutants for Java Programs
abstract
The presence of equivalent mutants has long been considered a major obstacle to the widespread adoption of mutation analysis and mutation testing. This paper presents a study on the types and prevalence of equivalent mutants in real-world Java programs. We conducted a ground-truth analysis of 1,992 mutants, sampled from 7 open source Java projects. Our analysis identified 215 equivalent mutants, which we grouped based on two criteria that describe why the mutants are equivalent and how challenging their detection is. From this analysis, we observed that (1) the median equivalent mutant rate across the 7 projects is 2.97%; (2) many equivalent mutants are caused by common programming patterns and their detection is not much more complex than structural pattern matching over an abstract syntax tree. Based on the findings of our ground-truth analysis, we developed Equivalent Mutant Suppression (EMS), a technique that comprises 10 efficient and targeted analyses. We evaluated EMS on 19 open- source Java projects, comparing the effectiveness and efficiency of EMS to two variants of Trivial Compiler Equivalence (TCE), the current state of the art in equivalent mutant detection. Additionally, we analyzed all 9,047 equivalent mutants reported by any tool to better understand the types and frequencies of equivalent mutants found. Overall, EMS detects 8,776 equivalent mutants within 325 seconds; TCE detects 2,124 equivalent mutants in 2,938 hours.
Benjamin Kushigian, Samuel J. Kaufman, Ryan Featherman, Hannah Potter, Ardi Madadi, René Just
ISSTA5
2022 Contextualized Programming Language Documentation
abstract
Learning the syntax and semantics of a new programming language is a challenge. It is common for learners to refer to language documentation many times and in many contexts as they build comfort and understanding. We review existing functional language documentation, finding that it tends to be organized according to the structure of the language. Each section interleaves narrative explanations, which introduce precise terminology that is then used consistently, with code examples. Sections often start with simpler special cases of a construct before considering it in full generality.
Hannah Potter, Ardi Madadi, René Just, Cyrus Omar
Onward!2