EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Tom Cornell
dblp:51/638
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 1997
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author
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.
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Logic in computer science · 50% Automata and formal languages · 30% Computational complexity · 20% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Information extraction and text analysis · 84% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 16% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
syntactic parsing |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Representing Constraints with Automata · ACL 1997 |
Logic in computer science
monadic second-order logic |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Representing Constraints with Automata · ACL 1997 |
Automata and formal languages
tree automata |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | Representing Constraints with Automata · ACL 1997 |
Computational complexity › constraint satisfaction
consistency checking |
0.0 | 1 | 1994 | On Determining the Consistency of Partial Descriptions of Trees · ACL 1994 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
constraint logic programming · 0.0remote dominance · 0.0disjunction and negation handling · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1997 | Representing Constraints with AutomataabstractIn this paper we describe an approach to constraint based syntactic theories in terms of finite tree automata. The solutions to constraints expressed in weak monadic second order (MSO) logic are represented by tree automata recognizing the assignments which make the formulas true. We show that this allows an efficient representation of knowledge about the content of constraints which can be used as a practical tool for grammatical theory verification. We achieve this by using the intertranslatability of formulae of MSO logic and tree automata and the embedding of MSO logic into a constraint logic programming scheme. The usefulness of the approach is discussed with examples from the realm of Principles-and-Parameters based parsing. Frank Morawietz, Tom Cornell |
ACL | 2 |
| 1994 | On Determining the Consistency of Partial Descriptions of TreesabstractWe examine the consistency problem for descriptions of trees based on remote dominance, and present a consistency-checking algorithm which is polynomial in the number of nodes in the description, despite disjunctions inherent in the theory of trees. The resulting algorithm allows for descriptions which go beyond sets of atomic formulas to allow certain types of disjunction and negation. Tom Cornell |
ACL | 1 |