VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Aniketh Janardhan Reddy
dblp:216/9333
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021
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.
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 75% Medical and health informatics · 25% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Language models and text generation · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bioinformatics and computational biology › synthetic biology
biological sequence design |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Designing Cell-Type-Specific Promoter Sequences Using Conservative Model-Based Optimization · NeurIPS 2024 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology
gene regulation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Designing Cell-Type-Specific Promoter Sequences Using Conservative Model-Based Optimization · NeurIPS 2024 |
Medical and health informatics
neuroimaging |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Can fMRI reveal the representation of syntactic structure in the brain? · NeurIPS 2021 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › text representation
syntactic representation |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Can fMRI reveal the representation of syntactic structure in the brain? · NeurIPS 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
fMRI encoding models · 1.0model-based optimization · 0.8conservative objective models · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Designing Cell-Type-Specific Promoter Sequences Using Conservative Model-Based OptimizationabstractGene therapies have the potential to treat disease by delivering therapeutic genetic cargo to disease-associated cells. One limitation to their widespread use is the lack of short regulatory sequences, or promoters, that differentially induce the expression of delivered genetic cargo in target cells, minimizing side effects in other cell types. Such cell-type-specific promoters are difficult to discover using existing methods, requiring either manual curation or access to large datasets of promoter-driven expression from both targeted and untargeted cells. Model-based optimization (MBO) has emerged as an effective method to design biological sequences in an automated manner, and has recently been used in promoter design methods. However, these methods have only been tested using large training datasets that are expensive to collect, and focus on designing promoters for markedly different cell types, overlooking the complexities associated with designing promoters for closely related cell types that share similar regulatory features. Therefore, we introduce a comprehensive framework for utilizing MBO to design promoters in a data-efficient manner, with an emphasis on discovering promoters for similar cell types. We use conservative objective models (COMs) for MBO and highlight practical considerations such as best practices for improving sequence diversity, getting estimates of model uncertainty, and choosing the optimal set of sequences for experimental validation. Using three leukemia cell lines (Jurkat, K562, and THP1), we show that our approach discovers many novel cell-type-specific promoters after experimentally validating the designed sequences. For K562 cells, in particular, we discover a promoter that has 75.85\% higher cell-type-specificity than the best promoter from the initial dataset used to train our models. Our code and data will be available at https://github.com/young-geng/promoter_design. Aniketh Janardhan Reddy, Xinyang Geng, Michael Herschl, Sathvik Kolli, Aviral Kumar, Patrick Hsu, Sergey Levine, Nilah Ioannidis |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2021 | Can fMRI reveal the representation of syntactic structure in the brain?abstractWhile studying semantics in the brain, neuroscientists use two approaches. One is to identify areas that are correlated with semantic processing load. Another is to find areas that are predicted by the semantic representation of the stimulus words. However, most studies of syntax have focused only on identifying areas correlated with syntactic processing load. One possible reason for this discrepancy is that representing syntactic structure in an embedding space such that it can be used to model brain activity is a non-trivial computational problem. Another possible reason is that it is unclear if the low signal-to-noise ratio of neuroimaging tools such as functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) can allow us to reveal the correlates of complex (and perhaps subtle) syntactic representations. In this study, we propose novel multi-dimensional features that encode information about the syntactic structure of sentences. Using these features and fMRI recordings of participants reading a natural text, we model the brain representation of syntax. First, we find that our syntactic structure-based features explain additional variance in the brain activity of various parts of the language system, even after controlling for complexity metrics that capture processing load. At the same time, we see that regions well-predicted by syntactic features are distributed in the language system and are not distinguishable from those processing semantics. Our code and data will be available at https://github.com/anikethjr/brainsyntacticrepresentations. Aniketh Janardhan Reddy, Leila Wehbe |
NeurIPS | 1 |