Advait Parulekar

dblp:256/1561 · also Advait U. Parulekar · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
2as first author
6since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 2 first-author · 5 since 2021Theory 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
4 papers
Representation and self-supervised learning · 28% Deep learning architectures and training · 24% Reinforcement learning · 19%

Topics — the 13 heaviest of 14, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
attention mechanism
0.812024
In-Context Learning with Transformers: Softmax Attention Adapts to Function Lipschitzness · NeurIPS 2024
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
in-context learning
0.812024
In-Context Learning with Transformers: Softmax Attention Adapts to Function Lipschitzness · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › attention mechanism
softmax attention
0.812024
In-Context Learning with Transformers: Softmax Attention Adapts to Function Lipschitzness · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer
0.812024
In-Context Learning with Transformers: Softmax Attention Adapts to Function Lipschitzness · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
contrastive learning
0.712023
InfoNCE Loss Provably Learns Cluster-Preserving Representations · COLT 2023
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › contrastive learning › contrastive loss
InfoNCE
0.712023
InfoNCE Loss Provably Learns Cluster-Preserving Representations · COLT 2023
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
invariant representation
0.712023
PAC Generalization via Invariant Representations · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
out-of-distribution generalization
0.712023
PAC Generalization via Invariant Representations · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory
PAC learning
0.712023
PAC Generalization via Invariant Representations · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › function approximation
linear function approximation
0.612022
Regret Bounds for Stochastic Shortest Path Problems with Linear Function Approximation · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
regret minimization
0.612022
Regret Bounds for Stochastic Shortest Path Problems with Linear Function Approximation · ICML 2022
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › planning under uncertainty
stochastic shortest path
0.612022
Regret Bounds for Stochastic Shortest Path Problems with Linear Function Approximation · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › regret minimization
sublinear regret
0.612022
Regret Bounds for Stochastic Shortest Path Problems with Linear Function Approximation · ICML 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

nearest-neighbor prediction · 0.8lipschitz analysis · 0.8structural equation model · 0.7invariant risk minimization · 0.7contrastive learning · 0.7augmentation · 0.7stationary policy · 0.6linear function approximation · 0.6computation oracle · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 In-Context Learning with Transformers: Softmax Attention Adapts to Function Lipschitzness
abstract
A striking property of transformers is their ability to perform in-context learning (ICL), a machine learning framework in which the learner is presented with a novel context during inference implicitly through some data, and tasked with making a prediction in that context. As such, that learner must adapt to the context without additional training. We explore the role of *softmax* attention in an ICL setting where each context encodes a regression task. We show that an attention unit learns a window that it uses to implement a nearest-neighbors predictor adapted to the landscape of the pretraining tasks. Specifically, we show that this window widens with decreasing Lipschitzness and increasing label noise in the pretraining tasks. We also show that on low-rank, linear problems, the attention unit learns to project onto the appropriate subspace before inference. Further, we show that this adaptivity relies crucially on the softmax activation and thus cannot be replicated by the linear activation often studied in prior theoretical analyses.
Liam Collins, Advait Parulekar, Aryan Mokhtari, Sujay Sanghavi, Sanjay Shakkottai
NeurIPS2
2023 InfoNCE Loss Provably Learns Cluster-Preserving Representations
abstract
The goal of contrasting learning is to learn a representation that preserves underlying clusters by keeping samples with similar content, e.g. the “dogness” of a dog, close to each other in the space generated by the representation. A common and successful approach for tackling this unsupervised learning problem is minimizing the InfoNCE loss associated with the training samples, where each sample is associated with their augmentations (positive samples such as rotation, crop) and a batch of negative samples (unrelated samples). To the best of our knowledge, it was unanswered if the representation learned by minimizing the InfoNCE loss preserves the underlying data clusters, as it only promotes learning a representation that is faithful to augmentations, i.e., an image and its augmentations have the same representation. Our main result is to show that the representation learned by InfoNCE with a finite number of negative samples is also consistent with respect to {\em clusters} in the data, under the condition that the augmentation sets within clusters may be non-overlapping but are close and intertwined, relative to the complexity of the learning function class.
Advait Parulekar, Liam Collins, Karthikeyan Shanmugam 0001, Aryan Mokhtari, Sanjay Shakkottai
COLT1
2023 PAC Generalization via Invariant Representations
abstract
Invariant representations are transformations of the covariates such that the best model on top of the representation is invariant across training environments. In the context of linear Structural Equation Models (SEMs), invariant representations might allow us to learn models with out-of-distribution guarantees, i.e., models that are robust to interventions in the SEM. To address the invariant representation problem in a *finite sample* setting, we consider the notion of $\epsilon$-approximate invariance. We study the following question: If a representation is approximately invariant with respect to a given number of training interventions, will it continue to be approximately invariant on a larger collection of unseen intervened SEMs? Inspired by PAC learning, we obtain finite-sample out-of-distribution generalization guarantees for approximate invariance that holds *probabilistically* over a family of linear SEMs without faithfulness assumptions.
Advait Parulekar, Karthikeyan Shanmugam 0001, Sanjay Shakkottai
ICML1
2022 Improved Algorithms for Misspecified Linear Markov Decision Processes
abstract
For the misspecified linear Markov decision process (MLMDP) model of Jin et al. [2020], we propose an algorithm with three desirable properties. (P1) Its regret after K episodes scales as Kmax{\ensuremath{\varepsilon}mis,\ensuremath{\varepsilon}tol}, where \ensuremath{\varepsilon}mis is the degree of misspecification and \ensuremath{\varepsilon}tol is a user-specified error tolerance. (P2) Its space and per-episode time complexities remain bounded as $K\rightarrow\infty$. (P3) It does not require \ensuremath{\varepsilon}mis as input. To our knowledge, this is the first algorithm satisfying all three properties. For concrete choices of \ensuremath{\varepsilon}tol, we also improve existing regret bounds (up to log factors) while achieving either (P2) or (P3) (existing algorithms satisfy neither). At a high level, our algorithm generalizes (to MLMDPs) and refines the Sup-Lin-UCB algorithm, which Takemura et al. [2021] recently showed satisfies (P3) in the contextual bandit setting. We also provide an intuitive interpretation of their result, which informs the design of our algorithm.
Daniel Vial, Advait Parulekar, Sanjay Shakkottai, R. Srikant 0001
AISTATS2
2022 Regret Bounds for Stochastic Shortest Path Problems with Linear Function Approximation
abstract
We propose an algorithm that uses linear function approximation (LFA) for stochastic shortest path (SSP). Under minimal assumptions, it obtains sublinear regret, is computationally efficient, and uses stationary policies. To our knowledge, this is the first such algorithm in the LFA literature (for SSP or other formulations). Our algorithm is a special case of a more general one, which achieves regret square root in the number of episodes given access to a computation oracle.
Daniel Vial, Advait Parulekar, Sanjay Shakkottai, R. Srikant 0001
ICML2
2021 L1 Regression with Lewis Weights Subsampling
abstract
We consider the problem of finding an approximate solution to $\ell_1$ regression while only observing a small number of labels. Given an $n \times d$ unlabeled data matrix $X$, we must choose a small set of $m \ll n$ rows to observe the labels of, then output an estimate $\widehatβ$ whose error on the original problem is within a $1 + \varepsilon$ factor of optimal. We show that sampling from $X$ according to its Lewis weights and outputting the empirical minimizer succeeds with probability $1-δ$ for $m > O(\frac{1}{\varepsilon^2} d \log \frac{d}{\varepsilon δ})$. This is analogous to the performance of sampling according to leverage scores for $\ell_2$ regression, but with exponentially better dependence on $δ$. We also give a corresponding lower bound of $Ω(\frac{d}{\varepsilon^2} + (d + \frac{1}{\varepsilon^2}) \log\frac{1}δ)$.
Aditya Parulekar, Advait Parulekar, Eric Price 0001
APPROX-RANDOM2