EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Doyoon Lee
dblp:404/1364
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · conflict
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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
1 paper |
Program analysis · 61% Program synthesis and code generation · 39% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program analysis › static analysis
abstract interpretation |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Inductive Program Synthesis by Meta-Analysis-Guided Hole Filling · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2026 |
Program synthesis and code generation
inductive program synthesis |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Inductive Program Synthesis by Meta-Analysis-Guided Hole Filling · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2026 |
Program analysis
static analysis |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Inductive Program Synthesis by Meta-Analysis-Guided Hole Filling · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2026 |
Program synthesis and code generation
syntax-guided synthesis |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Inductive Program Synthesis by Meta-Analysis-Guided Hole Filling · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
meta-analysis-guided search · 1.0abstraction-based pruning · 1.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Inductive Program Synthesis by Meta-Analysis-Guided Hole FillingabstractA popular approach to inductive program synthesis is to construct a target program via top-down search, starting from an incomplete program with holes and gradually filling these holes until a solution is found. During the search, abstraction-based pruning is used to eliminate infeasible candidate programs, significantly reducing the search space. Because of this pruning, the order in which holes are filled can drastically affect search efficiency: a wise choice can prune large swaths of the search space early, while a poor choice might explore many dead-ends. However, the choice of hole-filling order is largely unattended in program synthesis literature. In this paper, we propose a novel hole-filling strategy that leverages abstract interpretation to guide the order of hole-filling in program synthesis. Our approach overapproximates the behavior of the underlying abstract interpreter for pruning, enabling it to predict the most promising hole to fill next. We instantiate our approach to the domains of bitvectors and strings, which are commonly used in program synthesis tasks. We evaluate our approach on a set of benchmarks from the prior work, including SyGuS benchmarks, and show that it significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art approaches in terms of efficiency thanks to the abstract abstract interpretation techniques. Doyoon Lee, Woosuk Lee, Kwangkeun Yi |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 1 |