Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

William E. Byrd

dblp:71/4483 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
10ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0003-4730-5293ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 7 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Security and privacy · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Programming languages and type systems · 62% Program synthesis and code generation · 38%
Network and information security
1 paper
Systems and software security · 100%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Logic in computer science · 100%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Systems and software security
secure system design
1.012026
Analysis of the Security Design, Engineering, and Implementation of the SecureDNA System · NDSS 2026
Programming languages and type systems
language design
0.912025
Multi-stage Relational Programming · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025
Programming languages and type systems › metaprogramming
multi-stage programming
0.912025
Multi-stage Relational Programming · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025
Program synthesis and code generation
relational program synthesis
0.912025
Multi-stage Relational Programming · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025
Program synthesis and code generation
programming by example
0.312018
Neural Guided Constraint Logic Programming for Program Synthesis · NeurIPS 2018
Logic in computer science › logic programming
constraint logic programming
0.312018
Neural Guided Constraint Logic Programming for Program Synthesis · NeurIPS 2018
Programming languages and type systems
logic programming
0.312025
Multi-stage Relational Programming · Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

staging · 0.9relational interpretation · 0.9minikanren · 0.9recurrent neural network · 0.7graph neural network · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Analysis of the Security Design, Engineering, and Implementation of the SecureDNA System
Alan T. Sherman, Jeremy J. Romanik Romano, Edward Zieglar, Enis Golaszewski, Jonathan D. Fuchs, William E. Byrd
NDSS6
2025 Multi-stage Relational Programming
abstract
We transport multi-stage programming from functional to relational programming, with novel constructs to give programmers control over staging and non-determinism. We stage interpreters written as relations, in which the programs under interpretation can contain holes representing unknown expressions or values. By compiling the known parts without interpretive overhead and deferring interpretation to run time only for the unknown parts, we compound the benefits of staging (e.g., turning interpreters into compilers) and relational interpretation (e.g., turning functions into relations and synthesizing from sketches). We extend miniKanren with staging constructs and apply the resulting multi-stage language to relational interpreters for subsets of Racket and miniKanren as well as a relational recognizer for context-free grammars. We demonstrate significant performance gains across multiple synthesis problems, systematically comparing unstaged and staged computation, as well as indicatively comparing with an existing hand-tuned relational interpreter.
Michael Ballantyne, Rafaello Sanna, Jason Hemann, William E. Byrd, Nada Amin
Proc. ACM Program. Lang.4
2019 Lightweight Functional Logic Meta-Programming
Nada Amin, William E. Byrd, Tiark Rompf
APLAS2
2018 Neural Guided Constraint Logic Programming for Program Synthesis
abstract
Synthesizing programs using example input/outputs is a classic problem in artificial intelligence. We present a method for solving Programming By Example (PBE) problems by using a neural model to guide the search of a constraint logic programming system called miniKanren. Crucially, the neural model uses miniKanren's internal representation as input; miniKanren represents a PBE problem as recursive constraints imposed by the provided examples. We explore Recurrent Neural Network and Graph Neural Network models. We contribute a modified miniKanren, drivable by an external agent, available at https://github.com/xuexue/neuralkanren. We show that our neural-guided approach using constraints can synthesize programs faster in many cases, and importantly, can generalize to larger problems.
Lisa Zhang 0003, Gregory Rosenblatt, Ethan Fetaya, Renjie Liao 0001, William E. Byrd, Matthew Might, Raquel Urtasun, Richard S. Zemel
NeurIPS5
2017 A unified approach to solving seven programming problems (functional pearl)
abstract
We present seven programming challenges in Racket, and an elegant, unified approach to solving them using constraint logic programming in miniKanren.
William E. Byrd, A. Ballantyne, Gregory Rosenblatt, Matthew Might
Proc. ACM Program. Lang.1
2016 A small embedding of logic programming with a simple complete search
abstract
We present a straightforward, call-by-value embedding of a small logic programming language with a simple complete search. We construct the entire language in 54 lines of Racket---half of which implement unification. We then layer over it, in 43 lines, a reconstruction of an existing logic programming language, miniKanren, and attest to our implementation's pedagogical value. Evidence suggests our combination of expressiveness, concision, and elegance is compelling: since microKanren's release, it has spawned over 50 embeddings in over two dozen host languages, including Go, Haskell, Prolog and Smalltalk.
Jason Hemann, Daniel P. Friedman, William E. Byrd, Matthew Might
DLS3
2015 Control-flow analysis of dynamic languages via pointer analysis
abstract
We demonstrate how to map a control-flow analysis for a higher-order language (dynamic languages are typically higher-order) into a pointer analysis for a first-order language, such as C. This allows us to use existing pointer analysis tools to perform a control-flow analysis, exploiting their technical advancements and the engineering effort that went into developing them. We compare the results of two recent parallel pointer analysis tools with a parallel control-flow analysis tool. While it has been known that a control-flow analysis of higher-order languages and a pointer analysis of first-order languages are very similar, we demonstrate that these two analyses are actually more similar than previously thought. We present the first mapping between a high-order control-flow analysis and a pointer analysis.
Steven Lyde, William E. Byrd, Matthew Might
DLS2
2011 Kanor - A Declarative Language for Explicit Communication
Eric Holk, William E. Byrd, Jeremiah Willcock, Torsten Hoefler, Arun Chauhan 0001, Andrew Lumsdaine
PADL2
2010 An Access Control Architecture for Distributing Trust in Pervasive Computing Environments
abstract
Pervasive computing infrastructure is highly distributed and it is essential to develop security mechanisms that enhance the security of the system by distributing trust among the various infrastructure components. We present a novel access control architecture explicitly designed to distribute trust that combines threshold cryptography, multi-layer encryption, and mediated access to contextual data to support dynamically changing access control permissions. We present several models of our access control infrastructure and evaluate how well each design distributes trust and limits the behavior of misbehaving components. We also simulate the behavior of our threshold based access control scheme and evaluate the overhead of each infrastructure model.
Raquel L. Hill, Jalal Al-Muhtadi, William E. Byrd
EUC3
2008 alpha-leanTAP: A Declarative Theorem Prover for First-Order Classical Logic
Joseph P. Near, William E. Byrd, Daniel P. Friedman
ICLP2