Steering Committee Elections


  • Agata Ciabattoni (TU Wien)
    nominated by Cláudia Nalon and Elaine Pimentel
  • Anupam Das (University of Birmingham)
    nominated by Lutz Straßburger and Rajeev Goré
  • Didier Galmiche (LORIA - Université de Lorraine)
    nominated by Nicolas Peltier and Agata Ciabattoni
  • Andrei Popescu (University of Sheffield)
    nominated by (by Hans de Nivelle and Jasmin Blanchette)

Statement by Agata Ciabattoni

I am a professor at the Computer Science Faculty of the Vienna University of Technology. I am interested in non-classical logics: especially their proof theory, and applications in various fields (artificial intelligence, algebra, programming languages, Sanskrit philosophy, ..).

I feel full member of the Tableaux community: I have been regularly attending the conference and publishing there since 1999, served as PC members various time and belonging to the Tableaux Steering Committee since 2013. I am once again honored to be nominated to serve on the TSC.

I strongly support the idea of having a Best Paper Award and to join Tableaux and IJCAR every second year; this schedule allows Tableaux to maintain its identity and also to enlarge the community and facilitate the exchange of ideas and techniques.

Statement by Anupam Das

I am an associate professor at the University of Birmingham in UK, working primarily in proof theory, in particular its role as a foundation for automated reasoning. As a conference series, TABLEAUX has always been close to my heart. My very first paper was published at TABLEAUX 2011 and, since then, I have published several papers at TABLEAUX and IJCAR. I have contributed to the community by delivering a tutorial in 2017 and, most recently, organising the 2021 edition and serving as its PC chair, alongside Sara Negri. Since then I have also served as an SC member.

I am the only conference chair to have organised a hybrid TABLEAUX, and the future format of specialised conference series such as ours is an important issue. I believe that we should promote a two-tiered approach from conference chairs: physical participation should be prioritised, but virtual participation should be possible free of charge by means of a live stream and chat room (no two-way audio). A fully hybrid setup introduces technical complications, not least in terms of audio issues, the resolution of which increases the registration cost for participants and introduces organisational barriers for conference chairs. Furthermore, it is my view that hybrid socialising simply does not work (yet), and virtual participants are naturally less committed to the conference overall. On the other hand, streaming talks for free maintains the advantage of wider dissemination, while also encouraging physical participation. In my view, particularly for community-focussed conferences like Tableaux, it is essential that we continue to engage with each other physically from time to time; research is, after all, a social endeavour.

Beyond hybrid matters, I support TABLEAUX continuing to be part of IJCAR every two years, as well as colocation with FroCoS and/or ITP in a way that encourages interaction (e.g. common invited speakers and special sessions). In particular we should seek to enlarge the number of colocated tutorials and workshops to further strengthen our community (cf., e.g., FSCD).

In terms of publication, I believe we should move to an open access model, in particular LIPIcs (used by ICALP, FSCD, CSL,...). Springer have been a great partner and are usually very helpful, not least through sponsorship, but it is clear that closed access publication constitues a false economy. Our institutions pay exorbitant fees for access to our own papers and, as academics, we should generally strive to broaden access to our research. Conferences in our area are moving to open access, and we should not be left behind.

Statement by Didier Galmiche

I am Professor of Computer Science at Université de Lorraine and develops research works with my team at LORIA Laboratory (CNRS-INRIA) in Nancy. My research interests and works are on the semantics and proof theory of non-classical logics, the definition of (labelled or not) proof systems for studying substructural, intuitionistic, epistemic and separation logics through different aspects: proof-search, automated deduction and decidability questions and perspectives.

My involvement within the Tableaux community is strong since a long time (PC member, paper author in many editions, PC chair of Tableaux 97 and Tableaux 2013, SC member), in connection with CADE and FroCos communities with whom I have strong relationships. I was PC chair of IJCAR 2018 that is a central joint event for all these communities. I have worked, like others, since years to enhance the impact of Tableaux on topics related to "Logics and Automated Reasoning" and, if elected, I will go on in this perspective, from my researcher experience but mainly from further interactions within the community and the Steering Committee.

I propose to increase the positioning and impact by remaining open minded to new approaches and technologies, for instance coming from Formal Methods, Software Security and AI, and by maintaining the standing of Tableaux conferences (attractivity, accessibility, high-quality of conference programs and organizations). The current policy of co-location of Tableaux with other conferences and the regular inclusion in IJCAR deserve to be continued, with clear and identified positioning and representation of Tableaux in the scientific organization of such joint events.

Statement by Andrei Popescu

I am a senior lecturer (associate professor) at the University of Sheffield. I work in interactive theorem proving, proof systems for higher-order logic, inductive and coinductive data types, and information flow security. I use the proof assistant Isabelle/HOL as a vehicle for much of my research.

I became involved with the TABLEAUX community in 2015, when my verified conference management system CoCon was deployed to manage the submission process for that year's edition of the conference. I also had the privilege of organizing and co-chairing the 2019 edition, jointly with FroCoS (at the Middlesex University London, where I was affiliated at the time). TABLEAUX 2019 was very successful, having a record number of submissions that covered a good diversity of topics. I hope people have good memories from that visit to London.

I see TABLEAUX as an important part of the automated reasoning landscape, offering a complement to CADE that is friendlier to research of a more theoretical nature -- e.g., strong results in proof theory that are relevant to verification but are not (yet) backed by substantial implementation and evaluation, or bold ideas off the beaten track in non-standard logics and non-standard proof systems.

I was delighted to see (and hear) that many proof theorists send their best results to TABLEAUX. I believe that walking a fine line between (A) consolidating (and strongly advertising!) the status of TABLEAUX as *the* conference of choice in proof theory and non-classical logics, while at the same time (B) allowing an expansion towards emerging topics such as applications of AI in theorem proving, is the way forward for TABLEAUX.

I also support the continuation of the biennial IJCAR gathering, which has so far worked very well for keeping the automated reasoning community connected. Moreover, I believe we should give careful consideration to affordability and accessibility, on two fronts:

(1) I support engaging in negotiations with Springer (separately for TABLEAUX, not as part of IJCAR) for a good open access deal, ideally below the current 200 Euros status quo; while in parallel considering switching to LIPIcs proceedings as an alternative, and a negotiation stick.

(2) We should have a wide discussion, involving the entire community, about the best way to proceed with hybrid conference organization. There is a balance to be found between supporting the participants (offering a cheap option for remote participation) and supporting the organizers (allowing them some security in terms of funding predictability).