EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Suresh Talapaneni
dblp:442/0194
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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
1 paper |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures · 87% Embedded and real-time systems · 13% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Compilers and program optimization · 77% Program verification · 23% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Compilers and program optimization
verified compilation |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Ensuring Safety in Automotive Machine Learning Inference: From Pre-validated Static Kernels to Machine Learning Graph Compilation · CAV (3) 2026 |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures
kernel generation |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Ensuring Safety in Automotive Machine Learning Inference: From Pre-validated Static Kernels to Machine Learning Graph Compilation · CAV (3) 2026 |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures
machine learning accelerator |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Ensuring Safety in Automotive Machine Learning Inference: From Pre-validated Static Kernels to Machine Learning Graph Compilation · CAV (3) 2026 |
Program verification › security property verification
memory safety verification |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Ensuring Safety in Automotive Machine Learning Inference: From Pre-validated Static Kernels to Machine Learning Graph Compilation · CAV (3) 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
formal methods · 2.0MLIR · 2.0AI-driven testing · 2.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Ensuring Safety in Automotive Machine Learning Inference: From Pre-validated Static Kernels to Machine Learning Graph CompilationabstractAbstract Machine Learning (ML) inference is shifting from using pre-developed static, CUDA C++, GPU kernel libraries to using MLIR-based graph compilers that perform advanced optimizations and generate custom kernels. This paradigm shift reimagines how we achieve ML inference in safety-critical domains such as automotive applications. Traditional approaches relied on qualifying static kernel libraries—pre-built for fixed input shapes and parameter ranges—according to the ISO 26262 standard. However, the demanding performance requirements of diverse ML models and rapidly evolving hardware accelerators necessitate generating optimized kernels on the fly, which only ML graph compilers can provide. This paper presents an industrial experience report on a comprehensive verification framework for ML inference in automotive applications. We describe the transition from static kernels to dynamic ML graph compilation and introduce two complementary verification strategies: (1) formal methods targeting memory safety and concurrency properties in CUDA kernels and MLIR-based compiler; and (2) AI-driven testing for functional correctness. Our experience over multiple years of production use demonstrates that validating ML graph compiler output can satisfy the ISO 26262 ASIL B requirements - without requiring compiler tool qualification - while enabling performance and flexibility benefits. We discuss remaining challenges including scalability of formal verification and adapting to evolving compilers and hardware platforms. Jelena Frtunikj, Alex Latz, Ajit Mistry, Matthew Propp, Vasu Singh, Suresh Talapaneni, Amanda Tang, Damien Zufferey |
CAV (3) | 6 |