Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kustaa Kangas
dblp:149/1362
· DBLP profile ↗
12ranked-venue papers
6as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
0000-0002-5262-7919ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 7 · 3 first-authorTheory of computation · 5 · 3 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 4 · 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.
| Theoretical computer science
5 papers |
Computational complexity · 50% Combinatorics and discrete mathematics · 25% Algorithms and data structures · 20% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 67% Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 33% |
Topics — the 12 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computational complexity › counting problems
linear extension counting |
0.9 | 3 | 2018 | A Scalable Scheme for Counting Linear Extensions · IJCAI 2018 Counting Linear Extensions in Practice: MCMC Versus Exponential Monte Carlo · AAAI 2018 Counting Linear Extensions of Sparse Posets · IJCAI 2016 |
Computational complexity › counting problems
approximate counting |
0.7 | 2 | 2018 | A Scalable Scheme for Counting Linear Extensions · IJCAI 2018 Counting Linear Extensions in Practice: MCMC Versus Exponential Monte Carlo · AAAI 2018 |
Combinatorics and discrete mathematics
partial orders |
0.6 | 2 | 2018 | A Scalable Scheme for Counting Linear Extensions · IJCAI 2018 Counting Linear Extensions of Sparse Posets · IJCAI 2016 |
Combinatorics and discrete mathematics › partial orders
linear extensions |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | A Scalable Scheme for Counting Linear Extensions · IJCAI 2018 |
Algorithms and data structures › randomized algorithms › sampling
markov chain monte carlo |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Counting Linear Extensions in Practice: MCMC Versus Exponential Monte Carlo · AAAI 2018 |
Computational complexity › counting problems
counting algorithms |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Counting Linear Extensions of Sparse Posets · IJCAI 2016 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › algorithm selection
algorithm portfolios |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Predicting the Hardness of Learning Bayesian Networks · AAAI 2014 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › graphical models › structure learning
bayesian network structure learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Predicting the Hardness of Learning Bayesian Networks · AAAI 2014 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › graphical models › markov random field
markov network structure learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Learning Chordal Markov Networks by Dynamic Programming · NIPS 2014 |
Algorithms and data structures › algorithm engineering
algorithm selection |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Predicting the Hardness of Learning Bayesian Networks · AAAI 2014 |
Mathematical optimization
combinatorial optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Predicting the Hardness of Learning Bayesian Networks · AAAI 2014 |
Algorithms and data structures
dynamic programming |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Learning Chordal Markov Networks by Dynamic Programming · NIPS 2014 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
dynamic programming · 0.6portfolio algorithm · 0.4feature-based runtime prediction · 0.4relaxation tootsie pop · 0.3model counting · 0.3markov chain monte carlo · 0.3exponential-time counting · 0.3adaptive relaxation monte carlo · 0.3sparse poset algorithms · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | A Faster Tree-Decomposition Based Algorithm for Counting Linear ExtensionsabstractAbstract We investigate the problem of computing the number of linear extensions of a givenn-element poset whose cover graph has treewidtht. We present an algorithm that runs in time $${\tilde{O}}(n^{t+3})$$ O~(nt+3) for any constantt; the notation $${\tilde{O}}$$ O~ hides polylogarithmic factors. Our algorithm applies dynamic programming along a tree decomposition of the cover graph; the join nodes of the tree decomposition are handled by fast multiplication of multivariate polynomials. We also investigate the algorithm from a practical point of view. We observe that the running time is not well characterized by the parametersnandtalone: fixing these parameters leaves large variance in running times due to uncontrolled features of the selected optimal-width tree decomposition. We compare two approaches to select an efficient tree decomposition: one is to include additional features of the tree decomposition to build a more accurate, heuristic cost function; the other approach is to fit a statistical regression model to collected running time data. Both approaches are shown to yield a tree decomposition that typically is significantly more efficient than a random optimal-width tree decomposition. Kustaa Kangas, Mikko Koivisto, Sami Salonen |
Algorithmica | 1 |
| 2019 | Counting Linear Extensions: Parameterizations by TreewidthabstractWe consider the $$\#\hbox {P}$$ -complete problem of counting the number of linear extensions of a poset $$(\textsc {\#LE})$$ ; a fundamental problem in order theory with applications in a variety of distinct areas. In particular, we study the complexity of $$\textsc {\#LE}$$ parameterized by the well-known decompositional parameter treewidth for two natural graphical representations of the input poset, i.e., the cover and the incomparability graph. Our main result shows that $$\textsc {\#LE}$$ is fixed-parameter intractable parameterized by the treewidth of the cover graph. This resolves an open problem recently posed in the Dagstuhl seminar on Exact Algorithms. On the positive side we show that $${\textsc {\#LE}}$$ becomes fixed-parameter tractable parameterized by the treewidth of the incomparability graph. Eduard Eiben, Robert Ganian, Kustaa Kangas, Sebastian Ordyniak |
Algorithmica | 3 |
| 2018 | Counting Linear Extensions in Practice: MCMC Versus Exponential Monte CarloabstractCounting the linear extensions of a given partial order is a #P-complete problem that arises in numerous applications. For polynomial-time approximation, several Markov chain Monte Carlo schemes have been proposed; however, little is known of their efficiency in practice. This work presents an empirical evaluation of the state-of-the-art schemes and investigates a number of ideas to enhance their performance. In addition, we introduce a novel approximation scheme, adaptive relaxation Monte Carlo (ARMC), that leverages exact exponential-time counting algorithms. We show that approximate counting is feasible up to a few hundred elements on various classes of partial orders, and within this range ARMC typically outperforms the other schemes. Topi Talvitie, Kustaa Kangas, Teppo Niinimaki, Mikko Koivisto |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2018 | A Scalable Scheme for Counting Linear ExtensionsabstractCounting the linear extensions of a given partial order not only has several applications in artificial intelligence but also represents a hard problem that challenges modern paradigms for approximate counting. Recently, Talvitie et al. (AAAI 2018) showed that an exponential time scheme beats the fastest known polynomial time schemes in practice, even if allowing hours of running time. Here, we present a novel scheme, relaxation Tootsie Pop, which in our experiments exhibits polynomial characteristics and significantly outperforms previous schemes. We also instantiate state-of-the-art model counters for CNF formulas; two natural encodings yield schemes that, however, are inferior to the more specialized schemes. Topi Talvitie, Kustaa Kangas, Teppo Niinimaki, Mikko Koivisto |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 2018 | A Faster Tree-Decomposition Based Algorithm for Counting Linear ExtensionsabstractWe consider the problem of counting the linear extensions of an n-element poset whose cover graph has treewidth at most t. We show that the problem can be solved in time O~(n^{t+3}), where O~ suppresses logarithmic factors. Our algorithm is based on fast multiplication of multivariate polynomials, and so differs radically from a previous O~(n^{t+4})-time inclusion - exclusion algorithm. We also investigate the algorithm from a practical point of view. We observe that the running time is not well characterized by the parameters n and t alone, fixing of which leaves large variance in running times due to uncontrolled features of the selected optimal-width tree decomposition. For selecting an efficient tree decomposition we adopt the method of empirical hardness models, and show that it typically enables picking a tree decomposition that is significantly more efficient than a random optimal-width tree decomposition. Kustaa Kangas, Mikko Koivisto, Sami Salonen |
IPEC | 1 |
| 2018 | Empirical hardness of finding optimal Bayesian network structures: algorithm selection and runtime predictionabstractVarious algorithms have been proposed for finding a Bayesian network structure that is guaranteed to maximize a given scoring function. Implementations of state-of-the-art algorithms, solvers , for this Bayesian network structure learning problem rely on adaptive search strategies, such as branch-and-bound and integer linear programming techniques. Thus, the time requirements of the solvers are not well characterized by simple functions of the instance size. Furthermore, no single solver dominates the others in speed. Given a problem instance, it is thus a priori unclear which solver will perform best and how fast it will solve the instance. We show that for a given solver the hardness of a problem instance can be efficiently predicted based on a collection of non-trivial features which go beyond the basic parameters of instance size. Specifically, we train and test statistical models on empirical data, based on the largest evaluation of state-of-the-art exact solvers to date. We demonstrate that we can predict the runtimes to a reasonable degree of accuracy. These predictions enable effective selection of solvers that perform well in terms of runtimes on a particular instance. Thus, this work contributes a highly efficient portfolio solver that makes use of several individual solvers. Brandon M. Malone, Kustaa Kangas, Matti Järvisalo, Mikko Koivisto, Petri Myllymäki |
Mach. Learn. | 2 |
| 2016 | Counting Linear Extensions: Parameterizations by TreewidthabstractWe consider the #P-complete problem of counting the number of linear extensions of a poset (#LE); a fundamental problem in order theory with applications in a variety of distinct areas. In particular, we study the complexity of #LE parameterized by the well-known decompositional parameter treewidth for two natural graphical representations of the input poset, i.e., the cover and the incomparability graph. Our main result shows that #LE is fixed-parameter intractable parameterized by the treewidth of the cover graph. This resolves an open problem recently posed in the Dagstuhl seminar on Exact Algorithms. On the positive side we show that #LE becomes fixed-parameter tractable parameterized by the treewidth of the incomparability graph. Eduard Eiben, Robert Ganian, Kustaa Kangas, Sebastian Ordyniak |
ESA | 3 |
| 2016 | Counting Linear Extensions of Sparse Posets
Kustaa Kangas, Teemu Hankala, Teppo Niinimaki, Mikko Koivisto |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 2015 | Averaging of Decomposable Graphs by Dynamic Programming and Sampling
Kustaa Kangas, Teppo Niinimaki, Mikko Koivisto |
UAI | 1 |
| 2014 | Predicting the Hardness of Learning Bayesian NetworksabstractThere are various algorithms for finding a Bayesian networkstructure (BNS) that is optimal with respect to a given scoring function. No single algorithm dominates the others in speed, and, given a problem instance, it is a priori unclear which algorithm will perform best and how fast it will solve the problem. Estimating the runtimes directly is extremely difficult as they are complicated functions of the instance. The main contribution of this paper is characterization of the empirical hardness of an instance for a given algorithm based on a novel collection of non-trivial, yet efficiently computable features. Our empirical results, based on the largest evaluation of state-of-the-art BNS learning algorithms to date, demonstrate that we can predict the runtimes to a reasonable degree of accuracy, and effectively select algorithms that perform well on a particular instance. Moreover, we also show how the results can be utilized in building a portfolio algorithm that combines several individual algorithms in an almost optimal manner. Brandon M. Malone, Kustaa Kangas, Matti Järvisalo, Mikko Koivisto, Petri Myllymäki |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2014 | Learning Chordal Markov Networks by Dynamic Programming
Kustaa Kangas, Mikko Koivisto, Teppo Niinimaki |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2014 | On the Number of Connected Sets in Bounded Degree Graphs
Kustaa Kangas, Petteri Kaski, Mikko Koivisto, Janne H. Korhonen |
WG | 1 |