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

Nicholas A. Arnosti

dblp:127/7629 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

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

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-author

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
1 paper
Optimization for machine learning · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
convex optimization
0.212013
Cutting Plane Training for Linear Support Vector Machines · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2013
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › convex optimization
cutting plane methods
0.212013
Cutting Plane Training for Linear Support Vector Machines · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2013
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › regularized risk minimization
support vector machine training
0.212013
Cutting Plane Training for Linear Support Vector Machines · IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2013

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

cutting plane algorithm · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Cutting Plane Training for Linear Support Vector Machines
abstract
Support Vector Machines (SVMs) have been shown to achieve high performance on classification tasks across many domains, and a great deal of work has been dedicated to developing computationally efficient training algorithms for linear SVMs. One approach [1] approximately minimizes risk through use of cutting planes, and is improved by [2], [3]. We build upon this work, presenting a modification to the algorithm developed by Franc and Sonnenburg [2]. We demonstrate empirically that our changes can reduce cutting plane training time by up to 40 percent, and discuss how changes in data sets and parameter settings affect the effectiveness of our method.
Nicholas A. Arnosti, Jugal K. Kalita
IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng.1