Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Idan Refaeli
dblp:304/4372
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
0as first author
5since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 5 · 5 since 2021Theory of computation · 4 · 4 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.
| Artificial intelligence
3 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers |
Program verification · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.8 | 2 | 2023 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case Study · CAV (1) 2022 veriFIRE: Verifying an Industrial, Learning-Based Wildfire Detection System · FM 2023 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
neural network verification |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Marabou 2.0: A Versatile Formal Analyzer of Neural Networks · CAV (2) 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › verification
robustness verification |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Marabou 2.0: A Versatile Formal Analyzer of Neural Networks · CAV (2) 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
adversarial robustness |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case Study · CAV (1) 2022 |
Program verification
neural network verification |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case Study · CAV (1) 2022 |
Program verification › neural network verification
robustness verification |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case Study · CAV (1) 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
linear programming · 1.5SMT solving · 1.5verification · 1.1empirical evaluation · 1.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Proof Minimization in Neural Network Verification
Omri Isac, Idan Refaeli, Haoze Wu 0001, Clark W. Barrett, Guy Katz |
VMCAI | 2 |
| 2024 | Marabou 2.0: A Versatile Formal Analyzer of Neural NetworksabstractAbstract This paper serves as a comprehensive system description of version 2.0 of the Marabou framework for formal analysis of neural networks. We discuss the tool’s architectural design and highlight the major features and components introduced since its initial release. Haoze Wu 0001, Omri Isac, Aleksandar Zeljic, Teruhiro Tagomori, Matthew L. Daggitt, Wen Kokke, Idan Refaeli, Guy Amir, Kyle Julian, Shahaf Bassan, Pei Huang 0002, Ori Lahav 0002, Min Wu 0011, Min Zhang 0002, Ekaterina Komendantskaya, Guy Katz, Clark W. Barrett |
CAV (2) | 7 |
| 2023 | veriFIRE: Verifying an Industrial, Learning-Based Wildfire Detection System
Guy Amir, Ziv Freund, Guy Katz, Elad Mandelbaum, Idan Refaeli |
FM | 5 |
| 2023 | Formally Explaining Neural Networks within Reactive Systems
Shahaf Bassan, Guy Amir, Davide Corsi, Idan Refaeli, Guy Katz |
FMCAD | 4 |
| 2022 | Neural Network Robustness as a Verification Property: A Principled Case StudyabstractAbstract Neural networks are very successful at detecting patterns in noisy data, and have become the technology of choice in many fields. However, their usefulness is hampered by their susceptibility to adversarial attacks . Recently, many methods for measuring and improving a network’s robustness to adversarial perturbations have been proposed, and this growing body of research has given rise to numerous explicit or implicit notions of robustness. Connections between these notions are often subtle, and a systematic comparison between them is missing in the literature. In this paper we begin addressing this gap, by setting up general principles for the empirical analysis and evaluation of a network’s robustness as a mathematical property—during the network’s training phase, its verification, and after its deployment. We then apply these principles and conduct a case study that showcases the practical benefits of our general approach. Marco Casadio, Ekaterina Komendantskaya, Matthew L. Daggitt, Wen Kokke, Guy Katz, Guy Amir, Idan Refaeli |
CAV (1) | 7 |