VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Nikhil Ghosh
dblp:251/8779
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
3as first author
8since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 9 · 3 first-author · 8 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
9 papers |
Deep learning architectures and training · 23% Efficient and distributed learning · 21% Optimization for machine learning · 20% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Algorithms and data structures · 100% |
Topics — the 30 heaviest of 31, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › parameter-efficient fine-tuning
low-rank adaptation |
1.5 | 2 | 2024 | The Impact of Initialization on LoRA Finetuning Dynamics · NeurIPS 2024 LoRA+: Efficient Low Rank Adaptation of Large Models · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
parameter-efficient fine-tuning |
1.5 | 2 | 2024 | The Impact of Initialization on LoRA Finetuning Dynamics · NeurIPS 2024 LoRA+: Efficient Low Rank Adaptation of Large Models · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
autoencoder |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Effect of SGD Batch Size on Autoencoder Learning: Sparsity, Sharpness, and Feature Learning · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2025 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › stochastic gradient descent
batch size effects |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Effect of SGD Batch Size on Autoencoder Learning: Sparsity, Sharpness, and Feature Learning · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning
sparse coding |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Effect of SGD Batch Size on Autoencoder Learning: Sparsity, Sharpness, and Feature Learning · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2025 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Effect of SGD Batch Size on Autoencoder Learning: Sparsity, Sharpness, and Feature Learning · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2025 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › adaptive optimization
adaptive learning rate |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | LoRA+: Efficient Low Rank Adaptation of Large Models · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › over-parameterization
double descent |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | More is Better: when Infinite Overparameterization is Optimal and Overfitting is Obligatory · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | More is Better: when Infinite Overparameterization is Optimal and Overfitting is Obligatory · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
learning rate |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | LoRA+: Efficient Low Rank Adaptation of Large Models · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
over-parameterization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | More is Better: when Infinite Overparameterization is Optimal and Overfitting is Obligatory · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › regression
random feature regression |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | More is Better: when Infinite Overparameterization is Optimal and Overfitting is Obligatory · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
weight initialization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | The Impact of Initialization on LoRA Finetuning Dynamics · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
distribution learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Deconstructing Distributions: A Pointwise Framework of Learning · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › transformer
efficient transformer |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Alternating Updates for Efficient Transformers · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
mixture of experts |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | On the Benefits of Learning to Route in Mixture-of-Experts Models · EMNLP 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Alternating Updates for Efficient Transformers · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › mixture of experts
sparse mixture-of-experts |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Alternating Updates for Efficient Transformers · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Alternating Updates for Efficient Transformers · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods
kernel methods |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | The Three Stages of Learning Dynamics in High-dimensional Kernel Methods · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
learning dynamics |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | The Three Stages of Learning Dynamics in High-dimensional Kernel Methods · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › metric learning
ordinal embedding |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Landmark Ordinal Embedding · NeurIPS 2019 |
Algorithms and data structures › numerical linear algebra
dimensionality reduction |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Landmark Ordinal Embedding · NeurIPS 2019 |
Algorithms and data structures › embedding
ordinal embedding |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Landmark Ordinal Embedding · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
convergence analysis |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | The Effect of SGD Batch Size on Autoencoder Learning: Sparsity, Sharpness, and Feature Learning · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2025 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
non-convex optimization |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | The Effect of SGD Batch Size on Autoencoder Learning: Sparsity, Sharpness, and Feature Learning · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2025 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
density estimation |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Deconstructing Distributions: A Pointwise Framework of Learning · ICLR 2023 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › efficient language model
large language model efficiency |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Alternating Updates for Efficient Transformers · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › large-scale learning
model scaling |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | On the Benefits of Learning to Route in Mixture-of-Experts Models · EMNLP 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical estimation
statistical consistency |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Landmark Ordinal Embedding · NeurIPS 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
theoretical analysis · 1.4non-homogeneous random walk theory · 0.9hessian trace analysis · 0.9scaling argument · 0.8ridge regression · 0.8adam · 0.8LoRA · 0.8synthetic experiments · 0.7predict-and-correct mechanism · 0.7pointwise analysis · 0.7landmark-based strategy · 0.4bradley-terry-luce model · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | The Effect of SGD Batch Size on Autoencoder Learning: Sparsity, Sharpness, and Feature LearningabstractIn this work, we investigate the dynamics of stochastic gradient descent (SGD) when training a single-neuron autoencoder with linear or ReLU activation on orthogonal data. We show that for this non-convex problem, randomly initialized SGD with a constant step size successfully finds a global minimum for any batch size choice. However, the particular global minimum found depends upon the batch size. In the full-batch setting, we show that the solution is dense (i.e., not sparse) and is highly aligned with its initialized direction, showing that relatively little feature learning occurs. On the other hand, for any batch size strictly smaller than the number of samples, SGD finds a global minimum that is sparse and nearly orthogonal to its initialization, showing that the randomness of stochastic gradients induces a qualitatively different type of "feature selection" in this setting. Moreover, if we measure the sharpness of the minimum by the trace of the Hessian, the minima found with full-batch gradient descent are flatter than those found with strictly smaller batch sizes, in contrast to previous works which suggest that large batches lead to sharper minima. To prove convergence of SGD with a constant step size, we introduce a powerful tool from the theory of non-homogeneous random walks which may be of independent interest. Nikhil Ghosh, Spencer Frei, Wooseok Ha, Bin Yu 0001 |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 1 |
| 2024 | More is Better: when Infinite Overparameterization is Optimal and Overfitting is ObligatoryabstractIn our era of enormous neural networks, empirical progress has been driven by the philosophy that *more is better.*
Recent deep learning practice has found repeatedly that larger model size, more data, and more computation (resulting in lower training loss) optimizing to near-interpolation improves performance. In this paper, we give theoretical backing to these empirical observations by showing that these three properties hold in random feature (RF) regression, a class of models equivalent to shallow networks with only the last layer trained.
Concretely, we first show that the test risk of RF regression decreases monotonically with both the number of features and samples, provided the ridge penalty is tuned optimally. In particular, this implies that infinite width RF architectures are preferable to those of any finite width. We then proceed to demonstrate that, for a large class of tasks characterized by powerlaw eigenstructure, training to near-zero training loss is *obligatory:* near-optimal performance can *only* be achieved when the training error is much smaller than the test error. Grounding our theory in real-world data, we find empirically that standard computer vision tasks with convolutional neural kernels clearly fall into this class. Taken together, our results tell a simple, testable story of the benefits of overparameterization and overfitting in random feature models. James B. Simon, Dhruva Karkada, Nikhil Ghosh, Mikhail Belkin |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2024 | LoRA+: Efficient Low Rank Adaptation of Large ModelsabstractIn this paper, we show that Low Rank Adaptation (LoRA) as originally introduced in (Hu et al., 2021) leads to suboptimal finetuning of models with large width. This is due to the fact that adapter matrices A and B in LoRA are updated with the same learning rate in ADAM. Using scaling arguments for large width networks, we demonstrate that the same learning rate does not allow efficient feature learning. We then show that this suboptimality of LoRA can be corrected simply by setting different learning rates for the LoRA adapter matrices A and B with a well-chosen fixed ratio. We call this proposed algorithm LoRA+. In our extensive experiments, LoRA+ improves finetuning speed (up to ∼ 2X SpeedUp) and performance (1% − 2% improvements), at the same computational cost as LoRA. The code is available at https://github.com/nikhil-ghosh-berkeley/loraplus Soufiane Hayou, Nikhil Ghosh, Bin Yu 0001 |
ICML | 2 |
| 2024 | The Impact of Initialization on LoRA Finetuning DynamicsabstractIn this paper, we study the role of initialization in Low Rank Adaptation (LoRA) as originally introduced in Hu et al. (2021). Essentially, to start from the pretrained model, one can either initialize $B$ to zero and $A$ to random, or vice-versa. In both cases, the product $BA$ is equal to zero at initialization, which makes finetuning starts from the pretrained model. These two initialization schemes are seemingly similar. They should in-principle yield the same performance and share the same optimal learning rate. We demonstrate that this is an *incorrect intuition* and that the first scheme (of initializing $B$ to zero and $A$ to random) on average in our experiments yields better performance compared to the other scheme. Our theoretical analysis shows that the reason behind this might be that the first initialization allows the use of larger learning rates (without causing output instability) compared to the second initialization, resulting in more efficient learning of the first scheme. We validate our results with extensive experiments on LLMs. Soufiane Hayou, Nikhil Ghosh, Bin Yu 0001 |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2023 | On the Benefits of Learning to Route in Mixture-of-Experts ModelsabstractMixture-of-Expert (MoE) models, such as the Switch Transformer, allow us to scale model sizes while keeping the amount of compute time fixed.Prior work has established the computational benefits of MoE models.We investigate whether they offer benefits other than scaling up.A core component of these models is a router that routes input tokens to different experts in a layer.We show theoretical and empirical evidence that the router's ability to route intelligently confers a significant advantage to MoE models.We study synthetic settings where the input data is distributed in clusters and show theoretically and empirically that the router learns the cluster structure.Then we perform experiments on real data using the T5X library, where we observe that a trainable router confers a non-trivial benefit instead of a non-trainable router. Nishanth Dikkala, Nikhil Ghosh, Raghu Meka, Rina Panigrahy, Nikhil Vyas 0001, Xin Wang 0116 |
EMNLP | 2 |
| 2023 | Deconstructing Distributions: A Pointwise Framework of Learning
Gal Kaplun, Nikhil Ghosh, Boaz Barak, Preetum Nakkiran |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2023 | Alternating Updates for Efficient TransformersabstractIt has been well established that increasing scale in deep transformer networks leads to improved quality and performance. However, this increase in scale often comes with prohibitive increases in compute cost and inference latency. We introduce Alternating Updates (AltUp), a simple-to-implement method to increase a model's capacity without the computational burden. AltUp enables the widening of the learned representation, i.e., the token embedding, while only incurring a negligible increase in latency. AltUp achieves this by working on a subblock of the widened representation at each layer and using a predict-and-correct mechanism to update the inactivated blocks. We present extensions of AltUp, such as its applicability to the sequence dimension, and demonstrate how AltUp can be synergistically combined with existing approaches, such as Sparse Mixture-of-Experts models, to obtain efficient models with even
higher capacity. Our experiments on benchmark transformer models and language tasks demonstrate the consistent effectiveness of AltUp on a diverse set of scenarios. Notably, on SuperGLUE and SQuAD benchmarks, AltUp enables up to $87\%$ speedup relative to the dense baselines at the same accuracy. Cenk Baykal, Dylan J. Cutler, Nishanth Dikkala, Nikhil Ghosh, Rina Panigrahy, Xin Wang 0116 |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2022 | The Three Stages of Learning Dynamics in High-dimensional Kernel Methods
Nikhil Ghosh, Song Mei, Bin Yu 0001 |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2019 | Landmark Ordinal EmbeddingabstractIn this paper, we aim to learn a low-dimensional Euclidean representation from a set of constraints of the form “item j is closer to item i than item k”. Existing approaches for this “ordinal embedding” problem require expensive optimization procedures, which cannot scale to handle increasingly larger datasets. To address this issue, we propose a landmark-based strategy, which we call Landmark Ordinal Embedding (LOE). Our approach trades off statistical efficiency for computational efficiency by exploiting the low-dimensionality of the latent embedding. We derive bounds establishing the statistical consistency of LOE under the popular Bradley- Terry-Luce noise model. Through a rigorous analysis of the computational complexity, we show that LOE is significantly more efficient than conventional ordinal embedding approaches as the number of items grows. We validate these characterizations empirically on both synthetic and real datasets. We also present a practical approach that achieves the “best of both worlds”, by using LOE to warm-start existing methods that are more statistically efficient but computationally expensive. Nikhil Ghosh, Yuxin Chen 0001, Yisong Yue |
NeurIPS | 1 |