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

Bibaswan K. Chatterjee

dblp:178/3235 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Learning paradigms · 28% Graph learning · 28% Deep learning architectures and training · 28%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Mathematical optimization · 100%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Learning paradigms › semi-supervised learning › graph-based semi-supervised learning
graph transduction
0.212015
Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015
Machine learning › Graph learning
network embedding
0.212015
Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › regularization
spectral regularization
0.212015
Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization
convex optimization
0.212015
Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015
Mathematical optimization › convex relaxation
semidefinite relaxation
0.212015
Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization bounds
0.112015
Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015
Machine learning › Learning theory
PAC learning
0.112015
Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015

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

subgradient method · 0.4inexact proximal method · 0.4FISTA · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction
abstract
Recent literature~\cite{ando} suggests that embedding a graph on an unit sphere leads to better generalization for graph transduction. However, the choice of optimal embedding and an efficient algorithm to compute the same remains open. In this paper, we show that orthonormal representations, a class of unit-sphere graph embeddings are PAC learnable. Existing PAC-based analysis do not apply as the VC dimension of the function class is infinite. We propose an alternative PAC-based bound, which do not depend on the VC dimension of the underlying function class, but is related to the famous Lov\'{a}sz~$\vartheta$ function. The main contribution of the paper is SPORE, a SPectral regularized ORthonormal Embedding for graph transduction, derived from the PAC bound. SPORE is posed as a non-smooth convex function over an \emph{elliptope}. These problems are usually solved as semi-definite programs (SDPs) with time complexity $O(n^6)$. We present, Infeasible Inexact proximal~(IIP): an Inexact proximal method which performs subgradient procedure on an approximate projection, not necessarily feasible. IIP is more scalable than SDP, has an $O(\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}})$ convergence, and is generally applicable whenever a suitable approximate projection is available. We use IIP to compute SPORE where the approximate projection step is computed by FISTA, an accelerated gradient descent procedure. We show that the method has a convergence rate of $O(\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}})$. The proposed algorithm easily scales to 1000's of vertices, while the standard SDP computation does not scale beyond few hundred vertices. Furthermore, the analysis presented here easily extends to the multiple graph setting.
Rakesh Shivanna, Bibaswan K. Chatterjee, Raman Sankaran, Chiranjib Bhattacharyya, Francis R. Bach
NIPS2