Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Opale Sjöstedt
dblp:415/2921
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0003-7545-1383ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 2 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 verification · 67% Program analysis · 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
compositional symbolic execution |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Compositional Symbolic Execution for the Next 700 Memory Models · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Program verification › program logic › separation logic
incorrectness separation logic |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Compositional Symbolic Execution for the Next 700 Memory Models · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Program verification › program logic
separation logic |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Compositional Symbolic Execution for the Next 700 Memory Models · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
rocq · 0.9mechanized proof · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Soteria: Efficient Symbolic Execution as a Functional Library: Perhaps You Should Write Your Own Symbolic Execution Engine!abstractSymbolic execution (SE) tools often rely on intermediate languages (ILs) to support multiple programming languages, promising reusability and efficiency. In practice, this approach introduces trade-offs between performance, accuracy, and language feature support. We argue that building SE engines directly for each source language is both simpler and more effective. We present Soteria, a lightweight OCaml library for writing SE engines in a functional style, without compromising on performance, accuracy or feature support. Soteria enables developers to construct SE engines that operate directly over source-language semantics, offering configurability, compositional reasoning, and ease of implementation. Using Soteria, we develop Soteria-Rust, the first Rust SE engine supporting TreeBorrows (the intricate aliasing model of Rust), and Soteria-C, a compositional SE engine for C. Both tools are competitive with or outperform state-of-the-art tools such as Kani, Infer.Pulse, CBMC and Gillian-C in performance and the number of bugs detected. We formalise the theoretical foundations of Soteria and prove its soundness, demonstrating that sound, efficient, accurate, and expressive SE can be achieved without the compromises of ILs. Sacha-Élie Ayoun, Opale Sjöstedt, Azalea Raad |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 2 |
| 2025 | Compositional Symbolic Execution for the Next 700 Memory ModelsabstractMultiple successful compositional symbolic execution (CSE) tools and platforms exploit separation logic (SL) for compositional verification and/or incorrectness separation logic (ISL) for compositional bug-finding, including VeriFast, Viper, Gillian, CN, and Infer-Pulse. Previous work on the Gillian platform, the only CSE platform that is parametric on the memory model, meaning that it can be instantiated to different memory models, suggests that the ability to use custom memory models allows for more flexibility in supporting analysis of a wide range of programming languages, for implementing custom automation, and for improving performance. However, the literature lacks a satisfactory formal foundation for memory-model-parametric CSE platforms. In this paper, inspired by Gillian, we provide a new formal foundation for memory-model-parametric CSE platforms. Our foundation advances the state of the art in four ways. First, we mechanise our foundation (in the interactive theorem prover Rocq). Second, we validate our foundation by instantiating it to a broad range of memory models, including models for C and CHERI. Third, whereas previous memory-model-parametric work has only covered SL analyses, we cover both SL and ISL analyses. Fourth, our foundation is based on standard definitions of SL and ISL (including definitions of function specification validity, to ensure sound interoperation with other tools and platforms also based on standard definitions). Andreas Lööw, Seung Hoon Park, Daniele Nantes Sobrinho, Sacha-Élie Ayoun, Opale Sjöstedt, Philippa Gardner |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 5 |