EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Reza Hajisheykhi
dblp:58/7584
· DBLP profile ↗
10ranked-venue papers
7as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
0000-0002-0396-9701ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 3 · 3 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 2 first-authorSecurity and privacy · 2 · 2 first-authorTheory of computation · 2
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
2 papers |
Distributed systems · 60% Electronic design automation · 40% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Program verification · 100% | |
| Network and information security
2 papers |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 57% Authentication and access control · 43% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Distributed systems
distributed coordination |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Bounded Auditable Restoration of Distributed Systems · IEEE Trans. Computers 2017 |
Distributed systems
fault tolerance |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Bounded Auditable Restoration of Distributed Systems · IEEE Trans. Computers 2017 |
Distributed systems › fault tolerance
self-stabilization |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Bounded Auditable Restoration of Distributed Systems · IEEE Trans. Computers 2017 |
Program verification
model checking |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | A framework for verification of SystemC TLM programs with model slicing: a case study · DAC 2016 |
Program verification
model slicing |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | A framework for verification of SystemC TLM programs with model slicing: a case study · DAC 2016 |
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test
hardware verification |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | A framework for verification of SystemC TLM programs with model slicing: a case study · DAC 2016 |
Electronic design automation › hardware verification and test › functional verification
SystemC TLM verification |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | A framework for verification of SystemC TLM programs with model slicing: a case study · DAC 2016 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
protocol verification |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Knowledge-Based Automated Repair of Authentication Protocols · FM 2014 |
Electronic design automation
hardware/software co-design |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | A framework for verification of SystemC TLM programs with model slicing: a case study · DAC 2016 |
Authentication and access control › authentication
authentication protocol design |
0.1 | 1 | 2014 | Knowledge-Based Automated Repair of Authentication Protocols · FM 2014 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
fault injection · 0.5UPPAAL model transformation · 0.5knowledge-based reasoning · 0.2automated repair · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | A theory of integrating tamper evidence with stabilization
Reza Hajisheykhi, Ali Ebnenasir, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
Sci. Comput. Program. | 1 |
| 2017 | Bounded Auditable Restoration of Distributed SystemsabstractWe focus on protocols for auditable restoration of distributed systems. The need for such protocols arises due to conflicting requirements (e.g., access to the system should be restricted but emergency access should be provided). One can design such systems with a tamper detection approach (based on the intuition of In-case-of-emergency-break-glass). However, in a distributed system, such tampering, which are denoted as auditable events, is visible only for a single node. This is unacceptable since the actions they take in these situations can be different than those in the normal mode. Moreover, eventually, the auditable event needs to be cleared so that system resumes the normal operation. With this motivation, in this paper, we present two protocols for auditable restoration, where any process can potentially identify an auditable event. The first protocol has an unbounded state space while the second protocol uses bounded state space that does not increase with the length of the computation. In both protocols, whenever a new auditable event occurs, the system must reach an auditable state where every process is aware of the auditable event. Only after the system reaches an auditable state, it can begin the operation of restoration. Although any process can observe an auditable event, we require that only authorized processes can begin the task of restoration. Moreover, these processes can begin the restoration only when the system is in an auditable state. Our protocols are self-stabilizing and can effectively handle the case where faults or auditable events occur during the restoration protocol. Moreover, they can be used to provide auditable restoration to other distributed protocols. Reza Hajisheykhi, Mohammad Roohitavaf, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
IEEE Trans. Computers | 1 |
| 2016 | A framework for verification of SystemC TLM programs with model slicing: a case studyabstractIn this paper, we evaluate the effectiveness of model slicing to provide assurance about correctness of SystemC TLM programs. The need for such assurance is important since SystemC has become a de-facto standard for building systems with hardware/software co-design. Existing approaches that enable one to transform the given SystemC TLM program into an UPPAAL model that can be verified suffer from models that result in state space explosion. This problem becomes even more complex when verifying fault-tolerance. Model slicing has the potential to provide a solution to this problem. Therefore, we focus on developing a model slicer that extends existing work on model slicing and combines it with tools to generate UPPAAL models from SystemC TLM programs and tools to add the impact of faults to those UPPAAL models. The experimental results show that with the proposed framework, the designer is capable of verifying even very complex SystemC TLM models, which would have been impossible without the proposed approach. Reza Hajisheykhi, Mohammad Roohitavaf, Ali Ebnenasir, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
DAC | 1 |
| 2015 | Auditable Restoration of Distributed ProgramsabstractWe focus on a protocol for auditable restoration of distributed systems. The need for such protocol arises due to conflicting requirements (e.g., access to the system should be restricted but emergency access should be provided). One can design such systems with a tamper detection approach (based on the intuition of "break the glass door"). However, in a distributed system, such tampering, which are denoted as auditable events, is visible only for a single node. This is unacceptable since the actions they take in these situations can be different than those in the normal mode. Moreover, eventually, the auditable event needs to be cleared so that system resumes the normal operation. With this motivation, in this paper, we present a protocol for auditable restoration, where any process can potentially identify an auditable event. Whenever a new auditable event occurs, the system must reach an "auditable state" where every process is aware of the auditable event. Only after the system reaches an auditable state, it can begin the operation of restoration. Although any process can observe an auditable event, we require that only "authorized" processes can begin the task of restoration. Moreover, these processes can begin the restoration only when the system is in an auditable state. Our protocol is self-stabilizing and can effectively handle the case where faults or auditable events occur during the restoration protocol. Moreover, it can be used to provide auditable restoration to other distributed protocol. Reza Hajisheykhi, Mohammad Roohitavaf, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
SRDS | 1 |
| 2015 | "Slow is Fast" for wireless sensor networks in the presence of message losses
Reza Hajisheykhi, Ling Zhu 0001, Mahesh Arumugam, Murat Demirbas, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
J. Parallel Distributed Comput. | 1 |
| 2014 | Knowledge-Based Automated Repair of Authentication Protocols
Borzoo Bonakdarpour, Reza Hajisheykhi, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
FM | 2 |
| 2014 | Evaluating the Effect of Faults in SystemC TLM Models Using UPPAAL
Reza Hajisheykhi, Ali Ebnenasir, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
SEFM | 1 |
| 2013 | Modeling and Analyzing Timing Faults in Transaction Level SystemC Programs
Reza Hajisheykhi, Ali Ebnenasir, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
SSS | 1 |
| 2013 | Facilitating the design of fault tolerance in transaction level SystemC programs
Ali Ebnenasir, Reza Hajisheykhi, Sandeep S. Kulkarni |
Theor. Comput. Sci. | 2 |
| 2009 | An Analytical Performance Evaluation for WSNs Using Loop-Free Bellman Ford ProtocolabstractAlthough several analytical models have been proposed for wireless sensor networks (WSNs) with different capabilities, very few of them consider the effect of general service distribution as well as design constraints on network performance. This paper presents a new analytical model to compute message latency in a WSN with loop-free Bellman Ford routing strategy. The model considers limited buffer size for each node using M/G/1/k queuing system. Also, contention probability and resource utilization are suitably modeled. The results obtained from simulation experiments confirm that the model exhibits a high degree of accuracy for various network configurations. Mohammad Baharloo, Reza Hajisheykhi, Mohammad Arjomand, Amir Hossein Jahangir |
AINA | 2 |