Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Dennis Elbrächter
dblp:222/2047
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorTheory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 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.
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Learning theory · 70% Deep learning architectures and training · 30% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning theory
approximation theory |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Deep Neural Network Approximation Theory · IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training optimization |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | How degenerate is the parametrization of neural networks with the ReLU activation function? · NeurIPS 2019 |
Mathematical optimization › approximation theory
function approximation |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Deep Neural Network Approximation Theory · IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
kolmogorov complexity · 1.0approximation theory · 1.0stochastic gradient descent · 0.4sobolev norm · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Deep Neural Network Approximation TheoryabstractThis paper develops fundamental limits of deep neural network learning by characterizing what is possible if no constraints are imposed on the learning algorithm and on the amount of training data. Concretely, we consider Kolmogorov-optimal approximation through deep neural networks with the guiding theme being a relation between the complexity of the function (class) to be approximated and the complexity of the approximating network in terms of connectivity and memory requirements for storing the network topology and the associated quantized weights. The theory we develop establishes that deep networks are Kolmogorov-optimal approximants for markedly different function classes, such as unit balls in Besov spaces and modulation spaces. In addition, deep networks provide exponential approximation accuracy-i.e., the approximation error decays exponentially in the number of nonzero weights in the network-of the multiplication operation, polynomials, sinusoidal functions, and certain smooth functions. Moreover, this holds true even for one-dimensional oscillatory textures and the Weierstrass function-a fractal function, neither of which has previously known methods achieving exponential approximation accuracy. We also show that in the approximation of sufficiently smooth functions finite-width deep networks require strictly smaller connectivity than finite-depth wide networks. Dennis Elbrächter, Dmytro Perekrestenko, Philipp Grohs, Helmut Bölcskei |
IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory | 1 |
| 2019 | How degenerate is the parametrization of neural networks with the ReLU activation function?abstractNeural network training is usually accomplished by solving a non-convex optimization problem using stochastic gradient descent. Although one optimizes over the networks parameters, the main loss function generally only depends on the realization of the neural network, i.e. the function it computes. Studying the optimization problem over the space of realizations opens up new ways to understand neural network training. In particular, usual loss functions like mean squared error and categorical cross entropy are convex on spaces of neural network realizations, which themselves are non-convex. Approximation capabilities of neural networks can be used to deal with the latter non-convexity, which allows us to establish that for sufficiently large networks local minima of a regularized optimization problem on the realization space are almost optimal. Note, however, that each realization has many different, possibly degenerate, parametrizations. In particular, a local minimum in the parametrization space needs not correspond to a local minimum in the realization space. To establish such a connection, inverse stability of the realization map is required, meaning that proximity of realizations must imply proximity of corresponding parametrizations. We present pathologies which prevent inverse stability in general, and, for shallow networks, proceed to establish a restricted space of parametrizations on which we have inverse stability w.r.t. to a Sobolev norm. Furthermore, we show that by optimizing over such restricted sets, it is still possible to learn any function which can be learned by optimization over unrestricted sets. Dennis Elbrächter, Julius Berner, Philipp Grohs |
NeurIPS | 1 |