Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Nicolaas Kaashoek
dblp:159/3686
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0003-0436-0671ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Systems, architecture and hardware · 1Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
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 |
Distributed systems · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Distributed systems
edge computing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Running Consistent Applications Closer to Users with Radical for Lower Latency · SOSP 2025 |
Distributed systems › consistency models
linearizability |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Running Consistent Applications Closer to Users with Radical for Lower Latency · SOSP 2025 |
Distributed systems
replication |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Running Consistent Applications Closer to Users with Radical for Lower Latency · SOSP 2025 |
Distributed systems
consensus |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Running Consistent Applications Closer to Users with Radical for Lower Latency · SOSP 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
write intents · 0.9speculative execution · 0.9locking · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Running Consistent Applications Closer to Users with Radical for Lower LatencyabstractRunning applications close to users—in nearby datacenters, at edge points of presence, or in on-premises clusters—is attractive, as it reduces end-to-end latency. Moving strong consistent applications closer to users is difficult, as they incur high latencies either when accessing, or coordinating, their storage system. This restricts such applications to running co-located with their data, in a datacenter. Radical allows these applications to leverage the latency benefits that come from running near users. Radical uses its new LVI protocol to perform all necessary coordination in a single request. This request guarantees linearizability with a combination of locks, a validation step, and write intents. Radical hides the latency of the LVI request by overlapping it with speculative execution of the application. Our evaluation shows that Radical achieves 84–89% of the latency improvement obtainable by moving out of the datacenter, while providing Linearizability. Nicolaas Kaashoek, Oleg Aleksandrovich Golev, Austin T. Li, Amit Levy 0001, Wyatt Lloyd |
SOSP | 1 |
| 2015 | Game Theory based Peer Grading Mechanisms for MOOCsabstractAn efficient peer grading mechanism is proposed for grading the multitude of assignments in online courses. This novel approach is based on game theory and mechanism design. A set of assumptions and a mathematical model is ratified to simulate the dominant strategy behavior of students in a given mechanism. A benchmark function accounting for grade accuracy and workload is established to quantitatively compare effectiveness and scalability of various mechanisms. After multiple iterations of mechanisms under increasingly realistic assumptions, three are proposed: Calibration, Improved Calibration, and Deduction. The Calibration mechanism performs as predicted by game theory when tested in an online crowd-sourced experiment, but fails when students are assumed to communicate. The Improved Calibration mechanism addresses this assumption, but at the cost of more effort spent grading. The Deduction mechanism performs relatively well in the benchmark, outperforming the Calibration, Improved Calibration, traditional automated, and traditional peer grading systems. The mathematical model and benchmark opens the way for future derivative works to be performed and compared. William Wu, Constantinos Daskalakis, Nicolaas Kaashoek, Christos Tzamos, S. Matthew Weinberg |
L@S | 3 |