Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Paul Krogmeier
dblp:244/2375
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
5as first author
6since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-6710-9516ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 7 · 5 first-author · 5 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 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
6 papers |
Automata and formal languages · 42% Logic in computer science · 36% Automated reasoning and model checking · 14% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
3 papers |
Program synthesis and code generation · 50% Program verification · 33% Programming languages and type systems · 17% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 44% Vision and language · 44% Trustworthy machine learning · 13% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Privacy and data protection · 100% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Automata and formal languages
tree automata |
2.1 | 3 | 2025 | Synthesizing DSLs for Few-Shot Learning · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 Languages with Decidable Learning: A Meta-theorem · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2023 Learning formulas in finite variable logics · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2022 |
Program synthesis and code generation
domain-specific code generation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Synthesizing DSLs for Few-Shot Learning · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
neuro-symbolic reasoning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Composing Neural Learning and Symbolic Reasoning with an Application to Visual Discrimination · IJCAI 2022 |
Computer vision › Vision and language
visual relationship detection |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Composing Neural Learning and Symbolic Reasoning with an Application to Visual Discrimination · IJCAI 2022 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
automated reasoning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Synthesizing axiomatizations using logic learning · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2022 |
Logic in computer science › finite model theory
finite variable logics |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Learning formulas in finite variable logics · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2022 |
Logic in computer science
modal logic |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Synthesizing axiomatizations using logic learning · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2022 |
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Deciding accuracy of differential privacy schemes · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2021 |
Programming languages and type systems
heap-manipulating programs |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Deciding memory safety for single-pass heap-manipulating programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020 |
Program verification › security property verification
memory safety verification |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Deciding memory safety for single-pass heap-manipulating programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020 |
Program synthesis and code generation
syntax-guided synthesis |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Decidable Synthesis of Programs with Uninterpreted Functions · CAV (2) 2020 |
Program verification
uninterpreted programs |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Decidable Synthesis of Programs with Uninterpreted Functions · CAV (2) 2020 |
Computational complexity
decidability |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Deciding memory safety for single-pass heap-manipulating programs · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Composing Neural Learning and Symbolic Reasoning with an Application to Visual Discrimination · IJCAI 2022 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › decision procedures
decidable fragments |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Decidable Synthesis of Programs with Uninterpreted Functions · CAV (2) 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
macro grammars · 1.7few-shot learning · 1.7synthesis · 1.1decision procedure · 1.1meta-theorem · 0.7symbolic learning · 0.6neurosymbolic composition · 0.6neural network · 0.6logic learning · 0.6automata theory · 0.6schanuel's conjecture · 0.5program discontinuity · 0.5decision procedures · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Synthesizing DSLs for Few-Shot LearningabstractWe study the problem of synthesizing domain-specific languages (DSLs) for few-shot learning in symbolic domains. Given a base language and instances of few-shot learning problems, where each instance is split into training and testing samples, the DSL synthesis problem asks for a grammar over the base language that guarantees that small expressions solving training samples also solve corresponding testing samples. We prove that the problem is decidable for a class of languages whose semantics over fixed structures can be evaluated by tree automata and when expression size corresponds to parse tree depth in the grammar, and, furthermore, the grammars solving the problem correspond to a regular set of trees. We also prove decidability results for variants of the problem where DSLs are only required to express solutions for input learning problems and where DSLs are defined using macro grammars. Paul Krogmeier, P. Madhusudan |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 1 |
| 2023 | Languages with Decidable Learning: A Meta-theoremabstractWe study expression learning problems with syntactic restrictions and introduce the class of finite-aspect checkable languages to characterize symbolic languages that admit decidable learning. The semantics of such languages can be defined using a bounded amount of auxiliary information that is independent of expression size but depends on a fixed structure over which evaluation occurs. We introduce a generic programming language for writing programs that evaluate expression syntax trees, and we give a meta-theorem that connects such programs for finite-aspect checkable languages to finite tree automata, which allows us to derive new decidable learning results and decision procedures for several expression learning problems by writing programs in the programming language. Paul Krogmeier, P. Madhusudan |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 1 |
| 2022 | Composing Neural Learning and Symbolic Reasoning with an Application to Visual DiscriminationabstractWe consider the problem of combining machine learning models to perform higher-level cognitive tasks with clear specifications. We propose the novel problem of Visual Discrimination Puzzles (VDP) that requires finding interpretable discriminators that classify images according to a logical specification. Humans can solve these puzzles with ease and they give robust, verifiable, and interpretable discriminators as answers. We propose a compositional neurosymbolic framework that combines a neural network to detect objects and relationships with a symbolic learner that finds interpretable discriminators. We create large classes of VDP datasets involving natural and artificial images and show that our neurosymbolic framework performs favorably compared to several purely neural approaches. Adithya Murali, Atharva Sehgal, Paul Krogmeier, P. Madhusudan |
IJCAI | 3 |
| 2022 | Synthesizing axiomatizations using logic learningabstractAxioms and inference rules form the foundation of deductive systems and are crucial in the study of reasoning with logics over structures. Historically, axiomatizations have been discovered manually with much expertise and effort. In this paper we show the feasibility of using synthesis techniques to discover axiomatizations for different classes of structures, and in some contexts, automatically prove their completeness. For evaluation, we apply our technique to find axioms for (1) classes of frames in modal logic characterized in first-order logic and (2) the class of language models with regular operations. Paul Krogmeier, Zhengyao Lin, Adithya Murali, P. Madhusudan |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 1 |
| 2022 | Learning formulas in finite variable logicsabstractWe consider grammar-restricted exact learning of formulas and terms in finite variable logics. We propose a novel and versatile automata-theoretic technique for solving such problems. We first show results for learning formulas that classify a set of positively- and negatively-labeled structures. We give algorithms for realizability and synthesis of such formulas along with upper and lower bounds. We also establish positive results using our technique for other logics and variants of the learning problem, including first-order logic with least fixed point definitions, higher-order logics, and synthesis of queries and terms with recursively-defined functions. Paul Krogmeier, P. Madhusudan |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 1 |
| 2021 | Deciding accuracy of differential privacy schemesabstractDifferential privacy is a mathematical framework for developing statistical computations with provable guarantees of privacy and accuracy. In contrast to the privacy component of differential privacy, which has a clear mathematical and intuitive meaning, the accuracy component of differential privacy does not have a generally accepted definition; accuracy claims of differential privacy algorithms vary from algorithm to algorithm and are not instantiations of a general definition. We identify program discontinuity as a common theme in existing ad hoc definitions and introduce an alternative notion of accuracy parametrized by, what we call, — the of an input x w.r.t. a deterministic computation f and a distance d , is the minimal distance d ( x , y ) over all y such that f ( y )≠ f ( x ). We show that our notion of accuracy subsumes the definition used in theoretical computer science, and captures known accuracy claims for differential privacy algorithms. In fact, our general notion of accuracy helps us prove better claims in some cases. Next, we study the decidability of accuracy. We first show that accuracy is in general undecidable. Then, we define a non-trivial class of probabilistic computations for which accuracy is decidable (unconditionally, or assuming Schanuel’s conjecture). We implement our decision procedure and experimentally evaluate the effectiveness of our approach for generating proofs or counterexamples of accuracy for common algorithms from the literature. Gilles Barthe, Rohit Chadha, Paul Krogmeier, A. Prasad Sistla, Mahesh Viswanathan 0001 |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 3 |
| 2020 | Decidable Synthesis of Programs with Uninterpreted FunctionsabstractWe identify a decidable synthesis problem for a class of programs of unbounded size with conditionals and iteration that work over infinite data domains. The programs in our class use uninterpreted functions and relations, and abide by a restriction called coherence that was recently identified to yield decidable verification. We formulate a powerful grammar-restricted (syntax-guided) synthesis problem for coherent uninterpreted programs, and we show the problem to be decidable, identify its precise complexity, and also study several variants of the problem. Paul Krogmeier, Umang Mathur 0001, Adithya Murali, P. Madhusudan, Mahesh Viswanathan 0001 |
CAV (2) | 1 |
| 2020 | Deciding memory safety for single-pass heap-manipulating programsabstractWe investigate the decidability of automatic program verification for programs that manipulate heaps, and in particular, decision procedures for proving memory safety for them. We extend recent work that identified a decidable subclass of uninterpreted programs to a class of alias-aware programs that can update maps. We apply this theory to develop verification algorithms for memory safety— determining if a heap-manipulating program that allocates and frees memory locations and manipulates heap pointers does not dereference an unallocated memory location. We show that this problem is decidable when the initial allocated heap forms a forest data-structure and when programs are streaming-coherent , which intuitively restricts programs to make a single pass over a data-structure. Our experimental evaluation on a set of library routines that manipulate forest data-structures shows that common single-pass algorithms on data-structures often fall in the decidable class, and that our decision procedure is efficient in verifying them. Umang Mathur 0001, Adithya Murali, Paul Krogmeier, P. Madhusudan, Mahesh Viswanathan 0001 |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 3 |