Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Elizaveta Pertseva
dblp:258/6230
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
3as first author
5since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0001-9950-672XORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 3 first-author · 3 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Theory of computation · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021
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.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers |
Program verification · 72% Empirical software engineering · 28% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Representation and self-supervised learning · 33% Question answering and dialogue systems · 33% Information extraction and text analysis · 33% | |
| Network and information security
2 papers |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computing education · 100% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Multimedia analysis and retrieval · 100% |
Topics — the 12 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › proof systems
zero-knowledge proofs |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Automating Bitvector and Finite Field Equivalence Proofs in Lean · CAV (2) 2026 |
Program verification
automated reasoning and model checking |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Automating Bitvector and Finite Field Equivalence Proofs in Lean · CAV (2) 2026 |
Program verification
SMT-based verification |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Automating Bitvector and Finite Field Equivalence Proofs in Lean · CAV (2) 2026 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
satisfiability modulo theories |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Integer Reasoning Modulo Different Constants in SMT · CAV (1) 2025 |
Computing education
software engineering education |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | A Theory of Scientific Programming Efficacy · ICSE 2024 |
Empirical software engineering
developer studies |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | A Theory of Scientific Programming Efficacy · ICSE 2024 |
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems
knowledge base question answering |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Fine-tuned LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less with Few-Shot Sequence-to-Sequence Semantic Parsing over Wikidata · EMNLP 2023 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning
metric learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Contrastive Attention Networks for Attribution of Early Modern Print · AAAI 2023 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
semantic parsing |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Fine-tuned LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less with Few-Shot Sequence-to-Sequence Semantic Parsing over Wikidata · EMNLP 2023 |
Multimedia analysis and retrieval › image analysis › image understanding
historical document analysis |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Contrastive Attention Networks for Attribution of Early Modern Print · AAAI 2023 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
security protocol analysis |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Integer Reasoning Modulo Different Constants in SMT · CAV (1) 2025 |
Knowledge graphs › semantic web
wikidata |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Fine-tuned LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less with Few-Shot Sequence-to-Sequence Semantic Parsing over Wikidata · EMNLP 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
range lemmas · 2.0lean tactic · 2.0case analysis · 2.0bit-blasting · 2.0weighted gröbner bases · 1.7lifting and lowering · 1.7interview study · 1.5grounded theory · 1.5few-shot sequence-to-sequence semantic parsing · 1.3data synthesis · 1.3contrastive attention · 1.3LLM fine-tuning · 1.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Automating Bitvector and Finite Field Equivalence Proofs in LeanabstractAbstract Efforts to verify Zero-Knowledge Proof circuit encodings have highlighted the challenge of proving the correctness of quantifier-free statements that make use of both bitvector and finite field operations. Existing verification workflows are either manual or rely on SMT solvers, which scale poorly on some classes of problems for reasons that include difficulties with conversion operators and challenges reasoning about inequalities. To address these limitations, we present a novel Lean tactic that leverages range lemmas and case analysis to produce verified translations from finite fields to bitvectors. Our approach, combined with bit-blasting, outperforms state-of-the-art SMT solvers, solving 19% more ZKP arithmetization benchmarks. Elizaveta Pertseva, Valentin Robert, Clark W. Barrett, James Parker |
CAV (2) | 1 |
| 2025 | Integer Reasoning Modulo Different Constants in SMTabstractAbstract This paper presents a new refutation procedure for multimodular systems of integer constraints that commonly arise when verifying cryptographic protocols. These systems, involving polynomial equalities and disequalities modulo different constants, are challenging for existing solvers due to their inability to exploit multimodular structure. To address this issue, our method partitions constraints by modulus and uses lifting and lowering techniques to share information across subsystems, supported by algebraic tools like weighted Gr bner bases. Our experiments show that the proposed method outperforms existing state-of-the-art solvers in verifying cryptographic implementations related to Montgomery arithmetic and zero-knowledge proofs. Elizaveta Pertseva, Alex Ozdemir, Shankara Pailoor, Alp Bassa, Sorawee Porncharoenwase, Isil Dillig, Clark W. Barrett |
CAV (1) | 1 |
| 2024 | A Theory of Scientific Programming EfficacyabstractScientists write and maintain software artifacts to construct, validate, and apply scientific theories. Despite the centrality of software in their work, their practices differ significantly from those of professional software engineers. We sought to understand what makes scientists effective at their work and how software engineering practices and tools can be adapted to fit their workflows. We interviewed 25 scientists and support staff to understand their work. Then, we constructed a theory that relates six factors that contribute to their efficacy in creating and maintaining software systems. We present the theory in the form of a cycle of scientific computing efficacy and identify opportunities for improvement based on the six contributing factors. Elizaveta Pertseva, Melinda Chang, Ulia Zaman, Michael J. Coblenz |
ICSE | 1 |
| 2023 | Contrastive Attention Networks for Attribution of Early Modern PrintabstractIn this paper, we develop machine learning techniques to identify unknown printers in early modern (c.~1500--1800) English printed books. Specifically, we focus on matching uniquely damaged character type-imprints in anonymously printed books to works with known printers in order to provide evidence of their origins. Until now, this work has been limited to manual investigations by analytical bibliographers. We present a Contrastive Attention-based Metric Learning approach to identify similar damage across character image pairs, which is sensitive to very subtle differences in glyph shapes, yet robust to various confounding sources of noise associated with digitized historical books. To overcome the scarce amount of supervised data, we design a random data synthesis procedure that aims to simulate bends, fractures, and inking variations induced by the early printing process. Our method successfully improves downstream damaged type-imprint matching among printed works from this period, as validated by in-domain human experts. The results of our approach on two important philosophical works from the Early Modern period demonstrate potential to extend the extant historical research about the origins and content of these books. Nikolai Vogler, Kartik Goyal, Kishore PV Reddy, Elizaveta Pertseva, Samuel V. Lemley, Christopher N. Warren, Max G'Sell, Taylor Berg-Kirkpatrick |
AAAI | 4 |
| 2023 | Fine-tuned LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less with Few-Shot Sequence-to-Sequence Semantic Parsing over WikidataabstractWhile large language models (LLMs) can answer many questions correctly, they can also hallucinate and give wrong answers.Wikidata, with its over 12 billion facts, can be used to ground LLMs to improve their factuality.This paper presents WikiWebQuestions, a highquality question answering benchmark for Wikidata.Ported over from WebQuestions for Freebase, it consists of real-world data with SPARQL annotation.This paper presents a few-shot sequence-tosequence semantic parser for Wikidata.We modify SPARQL to use the unique domain and property names instead of their IDs.We train the parser to use either the results from an entity linker or mentions in the query.We fine-tune LLaMA by adding the few-shot training data to that used to fine-tune Alpaca.Our experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of this methodology, establishing a strong baseline of 76% and 65% answer accuracy in the dev and test sets of WikiWeb-Questions, respectively.By pairing our semantic parser with GPT-3, we combine verifiable results with qualified GPT-3 guesses to provide useful answers to 96% of the questions in dev.We also show that our method outperforms the state-of-the-art for the QALD-7 Wikidata dataset by 3.6% in F1 score. 1 * Equal contribution 1 Code, data, and model are available at https://github.com/stanford-oval/ wikidata-emnlp23 Silei Xu, Shicheng Liu, Theo Culhane, Elizaveta Pertseva, Meng-Hsi Wu, Sina J. Semnani, Monica S. Lam |
EMNLP | 4 |