Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kapil Earanky
dblp:228/5410
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Program verification · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program verification
bounded verification |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Safe replication through bounded concurrency verification · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2018 |
Distributed systems › replication
replicated data types |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Safe replication through bounded concurrency verification · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2018 |
Distributed systems
replication |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Safe replication through bounded concurrency verification · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2018 |
Distributed systems › consistency models
eventual consistency |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | Safe replication through bounded concurrency verification · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2018 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
bounded model checking · 0.7automated repair · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Safe replication through bounded concurrency verificationabstractHigh-level data types are often associated with semantic invariants that must be preserved by any correct implementation. While having implementations enforce strong guarantees such as linearizability or serializability can often be used to prevent invariant violations in concurrent settings, such mechanisms are impractical in geo-distributed replicated environments, the platform of choice for many scalable Web services. To achieve high-availability essential to this domain, these environments admit various forms of weak consistency that do not guarantee all replicas have a consistent view of an application's state. Consequently, they often admit difficult-to-understand anomalous behaviors that violate a data type's invariants, but which are extremely challenging, even for experts, to understand and debug. In this paper, we propose a novel programming framework for replicated data types (RDTs) equipped with an automatic (bounded) verification technique that discovers and fixes weak consistency anomalies. Our approach, implemented in a tool called Q9, involves systematically exploring the state space of an application executing on top of an eventually consistent data store, under an unrestricted consistency model but with a finite concurrency bound. Q9 uncovers anomalies (i.e., invariant violations) that manifest as finite counterexamples, and automatically generates repairs for such anamolies by selectively strengthening consistency guarantees for specific operations. Using Q9, we have uncovered a range of subtle anomalies in implementations of well-known benchmarks, and have been able to apply the repairs it mandates to effectively eliminate them. Notably, these benchmarks were written adopting best practices suggested to manage distributed replicated state (e.g., they are composed of provably convergent RDTs (CRDTs), avoid mutable state, etc.). While the safety guarantees offered by our technique are constrained by the concurrency bound, we show that in practice, proving bounded safety guarantees typically generalize to the unbounded case. Gowtham Kaki, Kapil Earanky, K. C. Sivaramakrishnan, Suresh Jagannathan |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 2 |