Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Hattie Zhou
dblp:241/5282
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
3as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 3 first-author · 4 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
6 papers |
Deep learning architectures and training · 33% Efficient and distributed learning · 17% Language models and text generation · 17% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automata and formal languages · 100% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › compositional generalization
length generalization |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | A Formal Framework for Understanding Length Generalization in Transformers · ICLR 2025 What Algorithms can Transformers Learn? A Study in Length Generalization · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | A Formal Framework for Understanding Length Generalization in Transformers · ICLR 2025 What Algorithms can Transformers Learn? A Study in Length Generalization · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › policy optimization
policy gradient |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Vanishing Gradients in Reinforcement Finetuning of Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reinforcement learning for NLP
reinforcement fine-tuning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Vanishing Gradients in Reinforcement Finetuning of Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › training dynamics
vanishing gradient |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Vanishing Gradients in Reinforcement Finetuning of Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms › continual learning
catastrophic forgetting |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Fortuitous Forgetting in Connectionist Networks · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
continual learning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Fortuitous Forgetting in Connectionist Networks · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training dynamics |
0.6 | 2 | 2022 | LCA: Loss Change Allocation for Neural Network Training · NeurIPS 2019 Fortuitous Forgetting in Connectionist Networks · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › convergence analysis
convergence analysis of neural network training |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | LCA: Loss Change Allocation for Neural Network Training · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression › sparse training
lottery ticket hypothesis |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermask · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermask · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
pruning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermask · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
sparse training |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermask · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression › weight masking
supermask |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermask · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
weight initialization |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermask · NeurIPS 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
norm-based regularizer · 1.7causal transformers · 0.9causal transformer · 0.9absolute positional encodings · 0.9absolute positional encoding · 0.9supervised fine-tuning · 0.8scratchpad · 0.8RASP programming language · 0.8connectionist network · 0.6runge-kutta integrator · 0.4path integral decomposition · 0.4ablation study · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | A Formal Framework for Understanding Length Generalization in TransformersabstractA major challenge for transformers is generalizing to sequences longer than those observed during training. While previous works have empirically shown that transformers can either succeed or fail at length generalization depending on the task, theoretical understanding of this phenomenon remains limited. In this work, we introduce a rigorous theoretical framework to analyze length generalization in causal transformers with learnable absolute positional encodings. In particular, we characterize those functions that are identifiable in the limit from sufficiently long inputs with absolute positional encodings under an idealized inference scheme using a norm-based regularizer. This enables us to prove the possibility of length generalization for a rich family of problems. We experimentally validate the theory as a predictor of success and failure of length generalization across a range of algorithmic and formal language tasks. Our theory not only explains a broad set of empirical observations but also opens the way to provably predicting length generalization capabilities in transformers. Xinting Huang, Andy Yang, Satwik Bhattamishra, Yash Raj Sarrof, Andreas Krebs, Hattie Zhou, Preetum Nakkiran, Michael Hahn 0001 |
ICLR | 6 |
| 2024 | Vanishing Gradients in Reinforcement Finetuning of Language ModelsabstractPretrained language models are commonly aligned with human preferences and downstream tasks via reinforcement finetuning (RFT), which refers to maximizing a (possibly learned) reward function using policy gradient algorithms. This work identifies a fundamental optimization obstacle in RFT: we prove that the expected gradient for an input vanishes when its reward standard deviation under the model is small, even if the expected reward is far from optimal. Through experiments on an RFT benchmark and controlled environments, as well as a theoretical analysis, we then demonstrate that vanishing gradients due to small reward standard deviation are prevalent and detrimental, leading to extremely slow reward maximization. Lastly, we explore ways to overcome vanishing gradients in RFT. We find the common practice of an initial supervised finetuning (SFT) phase to be the most promising candidate, which sheds light on its importance in an RFT pipeline. Moreover, we show that a relatively small number of SFT optimization steps on as few as 1% of the input samples can suffice, indicating that the initial SFT phase need not be expensive in terms of compute and data labeling efforts. Overall, our results emphasize that being mindful for inputs whose expected gradient vanishes, as measured by the reward standard deviation, is crucial for successful execution of RFT. Noam Razin, Hattie Zhou, Omid Saremi, Vimal Thilak, Arwen Bradley, Preetum Nakkiran, Joshua M. Susskind, Etai Littwin |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2024 | What Algorithms can Transformers Learn? A Study in Length GeneralizationabstractLarge language models exhibit surprising emergent generalization properties, yet also struggle on many simple reasoning tasks such as arithmetic and parity. In this work, we focus on length generalization, and we propose a unifying framework to understand when and how Transformers can be expected to length generalize on a given task. First, we show that there exist algorithmic tasks for which standard
decoder-only Transformers trained from scratch naturally exhibit strong length generalization. For these tasks, we leverage the RASP programming language (Weiss et al., 2021) to show that the correct algorithmic solution which solves the task can be represented by a simple Transformer. We thus propose the RASP-Generalization Conjecture: Transformers tend to learn a length-generalizing solution if there exists a short RASP-L program that works for all input lengths. We present empirical evidence to support the correlation between RASP-simplicity and generalization. We leverage our insights to give new scratchpad formats which yield strong length generalization on traditionally hard tasks (such as parity and addition), and we illustrate how scratchpad can hinder generalization when it increases the complexity of the corresponding RASP-L program. Overall, our work provides a novel perspective on the mechanisms of length generalization and the algorithmic capabilities of Transformers. Hattie Zhou, Arwen Bradley, Etai Littwin, Noam Razin, Omid Saremi, Joshua M. Susskind, Samy Bengio, Preetum Nakkiran |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2022 | Fortuitous Forgetting in Connectionist Networks
Hattie Zhou, Ankit Vani, Hugo Larochelle, Aaron C. Courville |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2019 | LCA: Loss Change Allocation for Neural Network TrainingabstractNeural networks enjoy widespread use, but many aspects of their training, representation, and operation are poorly understood. In particular, our view into the training process is limited, with a single scalar loss being the most common viewport into this high-dimensional, dynamic process. We propose a new window into training called Loss Change Allocation (LCA), in which credit for changes to the network loss is conservatively partitioned to the parameters. This measurement is accomplished by decomposing the components of an approximate path integral along the training trajectory using a Runge-Kutta integrator. This rich view shows which parameters are responsible for decreasing or increasing the loss during training, or which parameters "help" or "hurt" the network's learning, respectively. LCA may be summed over training iterations and/or over neurons, channels, or layers for increasingly coarse views. This new measurement device produces several insights into training. (1) We find that barely over 50% of parameters help during any given iteration. (2) Some entire layers hurt overall, moving on average against the training gradient, a phenomenon we hypothesize may be due to phase lag in an oscillatory training process. (3) Finally, increments in learning proceed in a synchronized manner across layers, often peaking on identical iterations. Janice Lan, Rosanne Liu, Hattie Zhou, Jason Yosinski |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2019 | Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the SupermaskabstractThe recent "Lottery Ticket Hypothesis" paper by Frankle & Carbin showed that a simple approach to creating sparse networks (keep the large weights) results in models that are trainable from scratch, but only when starting from the same initial weights. The performance of these networks often exceeds the performance of the non-sparse base model, but for reasons that were not well understood. In this paper we study the three critical components of the Lottery Ticket (LT) algorithm, showing that each may be varied significantly without impacting the overall results. Ablating these factors leads to new insights for why LT networks perform as well as they do. We show why setting weights to zero is important, how signs are all you need to make the re-initialized network train, and why masking behaves like training. Finally, we discover the existence of Supermasks, or masks that can be applied to an untrained, randomly initialized network to produce a model with performance far better than chance (86% on MNIST, 41% on CIFAR-10). Hattie Zhou, Janice Lan, Rosanne Liu, Jason Yosinski |
NeurIPS | 1 |