Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Shuangjie Yao
dblp:407/7514
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021Security and privacy · 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 · 67% Software testing · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program analysis › symbolic execution
path explosion |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Empc: Effective Path Prioritization for Symbolic Execution with Path Cover · SP 2025 |
Software testing › test optimization
path prioritization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Empc: Effective Path Prioritization for Symbolic Execution with Path Cover · SP 2025 |
Program analysis
symbolic execution |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Empc: Effective Path Prioritization for Symbolic Execution with Path Cover · SP 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
path cover · 0.9minimum path cover · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | TArCS: Trusted and Attack-Resilient Clock Source with TEE and RDMA
Yunpeng Xu, Yu Jin 0010, Shuangjie Yao, Teng Ma 0006, Shuwen Deng |
APPT | 4 |
| 2025 | Empc: Effective Path Prioritization for Symbolic Execution with Path CoverabstractSymbolic execution is a powerful program analysis technique that can formally reason the correctness of program behaviors and detect software bugs. It can systematically explore the execution paths of the tested program. But it suffers from an inherent limitation: path explosion. Path explosion occurs when symbolic execution encounters an overwhelming number (exponential to the program size) of paths that need to be symbolically reasoned. It severely impacts the scalability and performance of symbolic execution. To tackle this problem, previous works leverage various heuristics to prioritize paths for symbolic execution. They rank the exponential number of paths using static rules or heuristics and explore the paths with the highest rank. However, in practice, these works often fail to generalize to diverse programs. In this work, we propose a novel and effective path prioritization technique with path cover, named Empc. Our key insight is that not all paths need to be symbolically reasoned. Unlike traditional path prioritization, our approach leverages a small subset of paths as a minimum path cover (MPC) that can cover all code regions of the tested programs. To encourage diversity in path prioritization, we compute multiple MPCs. We then guide the search for symbolic execution on the small number of paths inside multiple MPCs rather than the exponential number of paths. We implement our technique Empc based on KLEE. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of Empc to investigate its performance in code coverage, bug findings, and runtime overhead. The evaluation shows that Empc can cover 19.6% more basic blocks than KLEE's best search strategy and 24.4% more lines compared to the state-of-the-art work cgs. Empc also finds 24 more security violations than KLEE's best search strategy. Meanwhile, Empc can significantly reduce the memory usage of KLEE by up to 93.5% and reduce the number of symbolic states by up to 88.6%. Shuangjie Yao, Dongdong She |
SP | 1 |