VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Manu Srinath Halvagal
dblp:241/3481
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
1 paper |
Representation and self-supervised learning · 87% Deep learning architectures and training · 13% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning › self-supervised representation learning
non-contrastive self-supervised learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Implicit variance regularization in non-contrastive SSL · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation analysis
representation collapse |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Implicit variance regularization in non-contrastive SSL · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
loss function design |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Implicit variance regularization in non-contrastive SSL · NeurIPS 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
isotropic loss · 0.7implicit variance regularization · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Implicit variance regularization in non-contrastive SSLabstractNon-contrastive SSL methods like BYOL and SimSiam rely on asymmetric predictor networks to avoid representational collapse without negative samples. Yet, how predictor networks facilitate stable learning is not fully understood. While previous theoretical analyses assumed Euclidean losses, most practical implementations rely on cosine similarity. To gain further theoretical insight into non-contrastive SSL, we analytically study learning dynamics in conjunction with Euclidean and cosine similarity in the eigenspace of closed-form linear predictor networks. We show that both avoid collapse through implicit variance regularization albeit through different dynamical mechanisms. Moreover, we find that the eigenvalues act as effective learning rate multipliers and propose a family of isotropic loss functions (IsoLoss) that equalize convergence rates across eigenmodes. Empirically, IsoLoss speeds up the initial learning dynamics and increases robustness, thereby allowing us to dispense with the EMA target network typically used with non-contrastive methods. Our analysis sheds light on the variance regularization mechanisms of non-contrastive SSL and lays the theoretical grounds for crafting novel loss functions that shape the learning dynamics of the predictor's spectrum. Manu Srinath Halvagal, Axel Laborieux, Friedemann Zenke |
NeurIPS | 1 |