Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Rini Banerjee
dblp:268/7871
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0008-6360-3972ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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
1 paper |
Program verification · 87% Programming languages and type systems · 13% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Program verification › dynamic verification
runtime verification |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Fulminate: Testing CN Separation-Logic Specifications in C · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Program verification › program logic
separation logic |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Fulminate: Testing CN Separation-Logic Specifications in C · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Programming languages and type systems
type systems |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Fulminate: Testing CN Separation-Logic Specifications in C · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
separation logic · 0.9runtime ownership testing · 0.9ghost state · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Code-Specify-Test-Debug-Prove: Flexibly Integrating Separation Logic Specification into Conventional WorkflowsabstractWe seek to enable more flexible use of rich specifications in a variety of ways that smoothly extend conventional software development practice. We show how a single specification language, based on separation logic to capture the subtle ownership disciplines of systems code, can be used for runtime assertion checking, for property-based testing, and for formal machine-checked proof—and how each of these complements and supports the others. We demonstrate all this on a challenging example: a component of a production hypervisor, running both stand-alone at user level and in situ in the hypervisor. Zain K. Aamer, Rini Banerjee, Hiroyuki Katsura, David Kaloper-Mersinjak, Dimitrios J. Economou, Kayvan Memarian, Dhruv C. Makwana, Neelakantan R. Krishnaswami, Benjamin C. Pierce, Christopher Pulte, Peter Sewell |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 2 |
| 2025 | Fulminate: Testing CN Separation-Logic Specifications in CabstractSeparation logic has become an important tool for formally capturing and reasoning about the ownership patterns of imperative programs, originally for paper proof, and now the foundation for industrial static analyses and multiple proof tools. However, there has been very little work on program testing of separationlogic specifications in concrete execution. At first sight, separation-logic formulas are hard to evaluate in reasonable time, with their implicit quantification over heap splittings, and other explicit existentials. In this paper we observe that a restricted fragment of separation logic, adopted in the CN proof tool to enable predictable proof automation, also has a natural and readable computational interpretation, that makes it practically usable in runtime testing. We discuss various design issues and develop this as a C + CN source to C source translation, Fulminate. This adds checks – including ownership checks and ownership transfer – for C code annotated with CN pre- and post-conditions; we demonstrate this on nontrivial examples, including the allocator from a production hypervisor. We formalise our runtime ownership testing scheme, showing (and proving) how its reified ghost state correctly captures ownership passing, in a semantics for a small C-like language. Rini Banerjee, Kayvan Memarian, Dhruv C. Makwana, Christopher Pulte, Neelakantan R. Krishnaswami, Peter Sewell |
Proc. ACM Program. Lang. | 1 |