Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Srinidhi Nagendra
dblp:342/2893
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
4since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0002-7171-5543ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 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.
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers |
Distributed systems · 74% Electronic design automation · 26% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Software testing · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Logic in computer science · 100% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Distributed systems
consensus |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Model-Guided Fuzzing of Distributed Systems · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
coverage-guided fuzzing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Model-Guided Fuzzing of Distributed Systems · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Distributed systems
distributed system testing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Model-Guided Fuzzing of Distributed Systems · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Software testing › fuzzing
coverage-guided fuzzing |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Reward Augmentation in Reinforcement Learning for Testing Distributed Systems · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2024 |
Software testing
random testing |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Reward Augmentation in Reinforcement Learning for Testing Distributed Systems · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2024 |
Distributed systems
fault tolerance |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Reward Augmentation in Reinforcement Learning for Testing Distributed Systems · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2024 |
Logic in computer science › temporal logic
TLA+ |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Model-Guided Fuzzing of Distributed Systems · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
random test generation · 1.7coverage-guided fuzzing · 1.7reward shaping · 1.5reinforcement learning · 1.5exploration bonus · 1.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | LLM-Assisted Analysis of On-Chip Protocol Implementations
Melisande Zonta-Roudes, Nora Hinderling, Supraja Sridhara, Srinidhi Nagendra, Shweta Shinde |
FCCM | 4 |
| 2025 | Optimal Concolic Dynamic Partial Order ReductionabstractStateless model checking (SMC) software implementations requires exploring both concurrency- and data nondeterminism. Unfortunately, most SMC algorithms focus on efficient exploration of concurrency nondeterminism, thereby neglecting an important source of bugs. We present ConDpor, an SMC algorithm for unmodified Java programs that combines optimal dynamic partial order reduction (DPOR) for concurrency nondeterminism, with concolic execution for data nondeterminism. ConDpor is sound, complete, optimal, and parametric w.r.t. the memory consistency model. Our experiments confirm that ConDpor is exponentially faster than DPOR with small-domain enumeration. Overall, ConDpor opens the door for efficient exploration of concurrent programs with data nondeterminism. Mohammad Hossein Khoshechin Jorshari, Michalis Kokologiannakis, Rupak Majumdar, Srinidhi Nagendra |
CONCUR | 4 |
| 2025 | Model-Guided Fuzzing of Distributed SystemsabstractWe present a coverage-guided testing algorithm for distributed systems implementations. Our main innovation is the use of an abstract formal model of the system that is used to define coverage. Such abstract models are frequently developed in the early phases of protocol design and verification but are infrequently used at testing time. We show that guiding random test generation using model coverage can be effective in covering interesting points in the implementation state space. We have implemented a fuzzer for distributed system implementations and abstract models written in TLA+. Our algorithm achieves better coverage over purely random exploration as well as random exploration guided by different notions of scheduler coverage and mutation. In particular, we show consistently higher coverage on implementations of distributed consensus protocols such as Two-Phase Commit and the Raft implementations in Etcd-raft and RedisRaft and detect bugs faster. Moreover, we discovered 12 previously unknown bugs in their implementations, four of which could only be detected by model-guided fuzzing. Ege Berkay Gulcan, Burcu Kulahcioglu Ozkan, Rupak Majumdar, Srinidhi Nagendra |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 4 |
| 2024 | Reward Augmentation in Reinforcement Learning for Testing Distributed SystemsabstractBugs in popular distributed protocol implementations have been the source of many downtimes in popular internet services. We describe a randomized testing approach for distributed protocol implementations based on reinforcement learning. Since the natural reward structure is very sparse, the key to successful exploration in reinforcement learning is reward augmentation. We show two different techniques that build on one another. First, we provide a decaying exploration bonus based on the discovery of new states—the reward decays as the same state is visited multiple times. The exploration bonus captures the intuition from coverage-guided fuzzing of prioritizing new coverage points; in contrast to other schemes, we show that taking the maximum of the bonus and the Q-value leads to more effective exploration. Second, we provide waypoints to the algorithm as a sequence of predicates that capture interesting semantic scenarios. Waypoints exploit designer insight about the protocol and guide the exploration to “interesting” parts of the state space. Our reward structure ensures that new episodes can reliably get to deep interesting states even without execution caching. We have implemented our algorithm in Go. Our evaluation on three large benchmarks (RedisRaft, Etcd, and RSL) shows that our algorithm can significantly outperform baseline approaches in terms of coverage and bug finding. Andrea Borgarelli, Constantin Enea, Rupak Majumdar, Srinidhi Nagendra |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 4 |