VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Chutong Yang
dblp:241/1151
· DBLP profile ↗
7ranked-venue papers
0as first author
6since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0001-4614-323XORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 5 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1Theory of computation · 1 · 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
5 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 45% Learning theory · 43% Efficient and distributed learning · 12% | |
| Theoretical computer science
4 papers |
Approximation and online algorithms · 43% Computational complexity · 28% Computational geometry · 19% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Privacy and data protection · 100% |
Topics — the 18 heaviest of 19, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Approximation and online algorithms › online learning
blackwell approachability |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Simultaneous Blackwell Approachability and Applications to Multiclass Omniprediction · COLT 2026 |
Approximation and online algorithms
online learning |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Simultaneous Blackwell Approachability and Applications to Multiclass Omniprediction · COLT 2026 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical learning theory
omniprediction |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Omnipredicting Single-Index Models with Multi-index Models · STOC 2025 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical estimation › semiparametric inference
single-index model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Omnipredicting Single-Index Models with Multi-index Models · STOC 2025 |
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Private Geometric Median in Nearly-Linear Time · NeurIPS 2025 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy
private statistical estimation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Private Geometric Median in Nearly-Linear Time · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computational geometry › proximity problems
geometric median |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Private Geometric Median in Nearly-Linear Time · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
calibration |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Testing Calibration in Nearly-Linear Time · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › calibration
calibration testing |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Testing Calibration in Nearly-Linear Time · NeurIPS 2024 |
Computational complexity
property testing |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Testing Calibration in Nearly-Linear Time · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Omnipredictors for Constrained Optimization · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness › fairness criteria
multicalibration |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Omnipredictors for Constrained Optimization · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
active learning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Active Learning Polynomial Threshold Functions · NeurIPS 2022 |
Computational complexity
query complexity |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Active Learning Polynomial Threshold Functions · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › classification
multiclass classification |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Simultaneous Blackwell Approachability and Applications to Multiclass Omniprediction · COLT 2026 |
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization › convex optimization
first-order methods |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Private Geometric Median in Nearly-Linear Time · NeurIPS 2025 |
Mathematical optimization
linear programming |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Testing Calibration in Nearly-Linear Time · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › active learning
batch active learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Active Learning Polynomial Threshold Functions · NeurIPS 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
potential function framework · 2.0subsampling · 1.7geometric aggregation · 1.7DP-SGD · 1.7linear programming · 1.5dynamic programming · 1.5query complexity analysis · 1.1derivative access · 1.1minimum-cost flow · 0.8minimum cost flow · 0.8post-processing · 0.7multicalibration · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Simultaneous Blackwell Approachability and Applications to Multiclass OmnipredictionabstractOmniprediction is a learning problem that requires suboptimality bounds for each of a family of losses $\mathcal{L}$ against a family of comparator predictors $\mathcal{C}$. We initiate the study of omniprediction in a multiclass setting, where the comparator family $\mathcal{C}$ may be infinite. Our main result is an extension of the recent binary omniprediction algorithm of Okoroafor et al. (2025) to the multiclass setting, with sample complexity (in statistical settings) or regret horizon (in online settings) $\approx \varepsilon^{-(k+1)}$, for $\varepsilon$-omniprediction in a $k$-class prediction problem. En route to proving this result, we design a framework of potential broader interest for solving Blackwell approachability problems where multiple sets must simultaneously be approached via coupled actions. Lunjia Hu, Kevin Tian, Chutong Yang |
COLT | 3 |
| 2025 | Private Geometric Median in Nearly-Linear TimeabstractEstimating the geometric median of a dataset is a robust counterpart to mean estimation, and is a fundamental problem in computational geometry. Recently, [HSU24] gave an $(\epsilon, \delta)$-differentially private algorithm obtaining an $\alpha$-multiplicative approximation to the geometric median objective, $\frac 1 n \sum_{i \in [n]} \|\cdot - \mathbf{x}_i\|$, given a dataset $D$ of $x_i$ for $i \in [n]$. Their algorithm requires $n \gtrsim \sqrt d \cdot \frac 1 {\alpha\epsilon}$ samples, which they prove is information-theoretically optimal. This result is surprising because its error scales with the effective radius of $D$ (i.e., of a ball capturing most points), rather than the worst-case radius. We give an improved algorithm that obtains the same approximation quality, also using $n \gtrsim \sqrt d \cdot \frac 1 {\alpha\epsilon}$ samples, but in time $\widetilde{O}(nd + \frac d {\alpha^2})$. Our runtime is nearly-linear, plus the cost of the cheapest non-private first-order method due to [CLMPS16]. To achieve our results, we use subsampling and geometric aggregation tools inspired by FriendlyCore [TCKMS22] to speed up the "warm start" component of the [HSU24] algorithm, combined with a careful custom analysis of DP-SGD's sensitivity for the geometric median objective. Syamantak Kumar, Daogao Liu, Kevin Tian, Chutong Yang |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2025 | Omnipredicting Single-Index Models with Multi-index Models
Lunjia Hu, Kevin Tian, Chutong Yang |
STOC | 3 |
| 2024 | Testing Calibration in Nearly-Linear TimeabstractIn the recent literature on machine learning and decision making, calibration has emerged as a desirable and widely-studied statistical property of the outputs of binary prediction models. However, the algorithmic aspects of measuring model calibration have remained relatively less well-explored. Motivated by Blasiok et al '23, which proposed a rigorous framework for measuring distances to calibration, we initiate the algorithmic study of calibration through the lens of property testing. We define the problem of calibration testing from samples where given $n$ draws from a distribution $\mathcal{D}$ on $(\text{predictions}, \text{binary outcomes})$, our goal is to distinguish between the cases where $\mathcal{D}$ is perfectly calibrated or $\epsilon$-far from calibration. We make the simple observation that the empirical smooth calibration linear program can be reformulated as an instance of minimum-cost flow on a highly-structured graph, and design an exact dynamic programming-based solver for it which runs in time $O(n\log^2(n))$, and solves the calibration testing problem information-theoretically optimally in the same time. This improves upon state-of-the-art black-box linear program solvers requiring $\Omega(n^\omega)$ time, where $\omega > 2$ is the exponent of matrix multiplication. We also develop algorithms for tolerant variants of our testing problem improving upon black-box linear program solvers, and give sample complexity lower bounds for alternative calibration measures to the one considered in this work. Finally, we present experiments showing the testing problem we define faithfully captures standard notions of calibration, and that our algorithms scale efficiently to accommodate large sample sizes. Lunjia Hu, Arun Jambulapati, Kevin Tian, Chutong Yang |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2023 | Omnipredictors for Constrained OptimizationabstractThe notion of omnipredictors (Gopalan, Kalai, Reingold, Sharan and Wieder ITCS 2022), suggested a new paradigm for loss minimization. Rather than learning a predictor based on a known loss function, omnipredictors can easily be post-processed to minimize any one of a rich family of loss functions compared with the loss of hypotheses in a class $\mathcal C$. It has been shown that such omnipredictors exist and are implied (for all convex and Lipschitz loss functions) by the notion of multicalibration from the algorithmic fairness literature. In this paper, we introduce omnipredictors for constrained optimization and study their complexity and implications. The notion that we introduce allows the learner to be unaware of the loss function that will be later assigned as well as the constraints that will be later imposed, as long as the subpopulations that are used to define these constraints are known. We show how to obtain omnipredictors for constrained optimization problems, relying on appropriate variants of multicalibration. We also investigate the implications of this notion when the constraints used are so-called group fairness notions. Lunjia Hu, Inbal Livni Navon, Omer Reingold, Chutong Yang |
ICML | 4 |
| 2022 | Active Learning Polynomial Threshold FunctionsabstractWe initiate the study of active learning polynomial threshold functions (PTFs). While traditional lower bounds imply that even univariate quadratics cannot be non-trivially actively learned, we show that allowing the learner basic access to the derivatives of the underlying classifier circumvents this issue and leads to a computationally efficient algorithm for active learning degree-$d$ univariate PTFs in $\tilde{O}(d^3\log(1/\varepsilon\delta))$ queries. We extend this result to the batch active setting, providing a smooth transition between query complexity and rounds of adaptivity, and also provide near-optimal algorithms for active learning PTFs in several average case settings. Finally, we prove that access to derivatives is insufficient for active learning multivariate PTFs, even those of just two variables. Omri Ben-Eliezer, Max Hopkins, Chutong Yang, Hantao Yu |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2019 | Detailed Placement for IR Drop Mitigation by Power Staple Insertion in Sub-10nm VLSIabstractPower Delivery Network (PDN) is one of the most challenging topics in modern VLSI design. Due to aggressive technology node scaling, resistance of back-end-of-line (BEOL) layers increases dramatically in sub-10nm VLSI, causing high supply voltage (IR) drop. To solve this problem, pre-placed or post-placed power staples are inserted in pin-access layers to connect adjacent power rails and reduce PDN resistance, at the cost of reduced routing flexibility, or reduced power staple insertion opportunity. In this work, we propose dynamic programming-based single-row and double-row detailed placement optimizations to maximize the power staple insertion in a post-placement flow. We further propose metaheuristics to improve the quality of result. Compared to the traditional post-placement flow, we achieve up to 13.2% (10mV ) reduction in IR drop, with almost no WNS degradation. Sun ik Heo, Andrew B. Kahng, Lutong Wang, Chutong Yang |
DATE | 5 |