Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Aravind Gollakota

dblp:264/1576 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
9ranked-venue papers
4as first author
7since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 8 · 3 first-author · 6 since 2021Theory of computation · 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
9 papers
Learning theory · 70% Trustworthy machine learning · 17% Generative modeling · 9%
Theoretical computer science
3 papers
Computational complexity · 90% Logic in computer science · 10%

Topics — the 25 heaviest of 26, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Learning theory › PAC learning
halfspace learning
2.132024
An Efficient Tester-Learner for Halfspaces · ICLR 2024
A Moment-Matching Approach to Testable Learning and a New Characterization of Rademacher Complexity · STOC 2023
Tester-Learners for Halfspaces: Universal Algorithms · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › PAC learning
testable learning
1.322023
A Moment-Matching Approach to Testable Learning and a New Characterization of Rademacher Complexity · STOC 2023
Tester-Learners for Halfspaces: Universal Algorithms · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical query learning
statistical query lower bound
1.022022
Hardness of Noise-Free Learning for Two-Hidden-Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2022
Statistical-Query Lower Bounds via Functional Gradients · NeurIPS 2020
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
calibration
0.912025
Provable Uncertainty Decomposition via Higher-Order Calibration · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation
uncertainty decomposition
0.912025
Provable Uncertainty Decomposition via Higher-Order Calibration · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation
0.912025
Provable Uncertainty Decomposition via Higher-Order Calibration · ICLR 2025
Computational complexity
learning theory
0.812024
An Efficient Tester-Learner for Halfspaces · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory › PAC learning
agnostic learning
0.712023
Agnostically Learning Single-Index Models using Omnipredictors · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model
0.712023
Ambient Diffusion: Learning Clean Distributions from Corrupted Data · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory
distributional assumptions
0.712023
Tester-Learners for Halfspaces: Universal Algorithms · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model
memorization mitigation
0.712023
Ambient Diffusion: Learning Clean Distributions from Corrupted Data · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical learning theory
omniprediction
0.712023
Agnostically Learning Single-Index Models using Omnipredictors · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization bounds
rademacher complexity
0.712023
A Moment-Matching Approach to Testable Learning and a New Characterization of Rademacher Complexity · STOC 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical estimation › semiparametric inference
single-index model
0.712023
Agnostically Learning Single-Index Models using Omnipredictors · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory
computational learning theory
0.612022
Hardness of Noise-Free Learning for Two-Hidden-Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory › computational learning theory
cryptographic hardness of learning
0.612022
Hardness of Noise-Free Learning for Two-Hidden-Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory
PAC learning
0.612022
Hardness of Noise-Free Learning for Two-Hidden-Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › regression › nonlinear regression
ReLU regression
0.412020
Statistical-Query Lower Bounds via Functional Gradients · NeurIPS 2020
Machine learning › Learning theory
statistical query learning
0.412020
Statistical-Query Lower Bounds via Functional Gradients · NeurIPS 2020
Computational complexity › lower bounds
superpolynomial lower bounds
0.412020
Superpolynomial Lower Bounds for Learning One-Layer Neural Networks using Gradient Descent · ICML 2020
Medical and health informatics › medical imaging › magnetic resonance imaging
MRI reconstruction
0.212023
Ambient Diffusion: Learning Clean Distributions from Corrupted Data · NeurIPS 2023
Image and video processing › image restoration
image inpainting
0.212023
Ambient Diffusion: Learning Clean Distributions from Corrupted Data · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › query learning
membership query learning
0.212022
Hardness of Noise-Free Learning for Two-Hidden-Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
ReLU networks
0.212022
Hardness of Noise-Free Learning for Two-Hidden-Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2022
Logic in computer science
higher-order logic
0.112020
Statistical-Query Lower Bounds via Functional Gradients · NeurIPS 2020

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

moment matching · 2.2measurement distortion · 2.0conditional expectation · 2.0nonconvex SGD · 1.5ensemble methods · 0.9calibration · 0.9bayesian methods · 0.9calibrated multiaccuracy · 0.7bregman divergence · 0.7GLMtron · 0.7statistical query algorithms · 0.4gradient descent · 0.4gradient boosting · 0.4convex functional · 0.4SQ dimension · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Provable Uncertainty Decomposition via Higher-Order Calibration
abstract
We give a principled method for decomposing the predictive uncertainty of a model into aleatoric and epistemic components with explicit semantics relating them to the real-world data distribution. While many works in the literature have proposed such decompositions, they lack the type of formal guarantees we provide. Our method is based on the new notion of higher-order calibration, which generalizes ordinary calibration to the setting of higher-order predictors that predict _mixtures_ over label distributions at every point. We show how to measure as well as achieve higher-order calibration using access to $k$-snapshots, namely examples where each point has $k$ independent conditional labels. Under higher-order calibration, the estimated aleatoric uncertainty at a point is guaranteed to match the real-world aleatoric uncertainty averaged over all points where the prediction is made. To our knowledge, this is the first formal guarantee of this type that places no assumptions whatsoever on the real-world data distribution. Importantly, higher-order calibration is also applicable to existing higher-order predictors such as Bayesian and ensemble models and provides a natural evaluation metric for such models. We demonstrate through experiments that our method produces meaningful uncertainty decompositions in tasks such as image classification.
Gustaf Ahdritz, Aravind Gollakota, Parikshit Gopalan, Charlotte Peale, Udi Wieder
ICLR2
2024 An Efficient Tester-Learner for Halfspaces
abstract
We give the first efficient algorithm for learning halfspaces in the testable learning model recently defined by Rubinfeld and Vasilyan [2022]. In this model, a learner certifies that the accuracy of its output hypothesis is near optimal whenever the training set passes an associated test, and training sets drawn from some target distribution must pass the test. This model is more challenging than distribution-specific agnostic or Massart noise models where the learner is allowed to fail arbitrarily if the distributional assumption does not hold. We consider the setting where the target distribution is the standard Gaussian in $d$ dimensions and the label noise is either Massart or adversarial (agnostic). For Massart noise, our tester-learner runs in polynomial time and outputs a hypothesis with (information-theoretically optimal) error $\mathrm{opt}+\epsilon$ (and extends to any fixed strongly log-concave target distribution). For adversarial noise, our tester-learner obtains error $O(\mathrm{opt})+\epsilon$ in polynomial time. Prior work on testable learning ignores the labels in the training set and checks that the empirical moments of the covariates are close to the moments of the base distribution. Here we develop new tests of independent interest that make critical use of the labels and combine them with the moment-matching approach of Gollakota et al. [2022]. This enables us to implement a testable variant of the algorithm of Diakonikolas et al. [2020a, 2020b] for learning noisy halfspaces using nonconvex SGD.
Aravind Gollakota, Adam R. Klivans, Konstantinos Stavropoulos, Arsen Vasilyan
ICLR1
2023 Ambient Diffusion: Learning Clean Distributions from Corrupted Data
abstract
We present the first diffusion-based framework that can learn an unknown distribution using only highly-corrupted samples. This problem arises in scientific applications where access to uncorrupted samples is impossible or expensive to acquire. Another benefit of our approach is the ability to train generative models that are less likely to memorize any individual training sample, since they never observe clean training data. Our main idea is to introduce additional measurement distortion during the diffusion process and require the model to predict the original corrupted image from the further corrupted image. We prove that our method leads to models that learn the conditional expectation of the full uncorrupted image given this additional measurement corruption. This holds for any corruption process that satisfies some technical conditions (and in particular includes inpainting and compressed sensing). We train models on standard benchmarks (CelebA, CIFAR-10 and AFHQ) and show that we can learn the distribution even when all the training samples have 90\% of their pixels missing. We also show that we can finetune foundation models on small corrupted datasets (e.g. MRI scans with block corruptions) and learn the clean distribution without memorizing the training set.
Giannis Daras, Kulin Shah, Yuval Dagan, Aravind Gollakota, Alexandros G. Dimakis, Adam R. Klivans
NeurIPS4
2023 Agnostically Learning Single-Index Models using Omnipredictors
abstract
We give the first result for agnostically learning Single-Index Models (SIMs) with arbitrary monotone and Lipschitz activations. All prior work either held only in the realizable setting or required the activation to be known. Moreover, we only require the marginal to have bounded second moments, whereas all prior work required stronger distributional assumptions (such as anticoncentration or boundedness). Our algorithm is based on recent work by Gopalan et al. [2023] on Omniprediction using predictors satisfying calibrated multiaccuracy. Our analysis is simple and relies on the relationship between Bregman divergences (or matching losses) and $\ell_p$ distances. We also provide new guarantees for standard algorithms like GLMtron and logistic regression in the agnostic setting.
Aravind Gollakota, Parikshit Gopalan, Adam R. Klivans, Konstantinos Stavropoulos
NeurIPS1
2023 Tester-Learners for Halfspaces: Universal Algorithms
abstract
We give the first tester-learner for halfspaces that succeeds universally over a wide class of structured distributions. Our universal tester-learner runs in fully polynomial time and has the following guarantee: the learner achieves error $O(\mathrm{opt}) + \epsilon$ on any labeled distribution that the tester accepts, and moreover, the tester accepts whenever the marginal is any distribution that satisfies a Poincare inequality. In contrast to prior work on testable learning, our tester is not tailored to any single target distribution but rather succeeds for an entire target class of distributions. The class of Poincare distributions includes all strongly log-concave distributions, and, assuming the Kannan--Lovasz--Simonovits (KLS) conjecture, includes all log-concave distributions. In the special case where the label noise is known to be Massart, our tester-learner achieves error $\mathrm{opt} + \epsilon$ while accepting all log-concave distributions unconditionally (without assuming KLS). Our tests rely on checking hypercontractivity of the unknown distribution using a sum-of-squares (SOS) program, and crucially make use of the fact that Poincare distributions are certifiably hypercontractive in the SOS framework.
Aravind Gollakota, Adam R. Klivans, Konstantinos Stavropoulos, Arsen Vasilyan
NeurIPS1
2023 A Moment-Matching Approach to Testable Learning and a New Characterization of Rademacher Complexity
abstract
A remarkable recent paper by Rubinfeld and Vasilyan (2022) initiated the study of testable learning, where the goal is to replace hard-to-verify distributional assumptions (such as Gaussianity) with efficiently testable ones and to require that the learner succeed whenever the unknown distribution passes the corresponding test. In this model, they gave an efficient algorithm for learning halfspaces under testable assumptions that are provably satisfied by Gaussians.
Aravind Gollakota, Adam R. Klivans, Pravesh Kothari
STOC1
2022 Hardness of Noise-Free Learning for Two-Hidden-Layer Neural Networks
abstract
We give superpolynomial statistical query (SQ) lower bounds for learning two-hidden-layer ReLU networks with respect to Gaussian inputs in the standard (noise-free) model. No general SQ lower bounds were known for learning ReLU networks of any depth in this setting: previous SQ lower bounds held only for adversarial noise models (agnostic learning) (Kothari and Klivans 2014, Goel et al. 2020a, Diakonikolas et al. 2020a) or restricted models such as correlational SQ (Goel et al. 2020b, Diakonikolas et al. 2020b). Prior work hinted at the impossibility of our result: Vempala and Wilmes (2019) showed that general SQ lower bounds cannot apply to any real-valued family of functions that satisfies a simple non-degeneracy condition. To circumvent their result, we refine a lifting procedure due to Daniely and Vardi (2021) that reduces Boolean PAC learning problems to Gaussian ones. We show how to extend their technique to other learning models and, in many well-studied cases, obtain a more efficient reduction. As such, we also prove new cryptographic hardness results for PAC learning two-hidden-layer ReLU networks, as well as new lower bounds for learning constant-depth ReLU networks from membership queries.
Sitan Chen, Aravind Gollakota, Adam R. Klivans, Raghu Meka
NeurIPS2
2020 Superpolynomial Lower Bounds for Learning One-Layer Neural Networks using Gradient Descent
abstract
We give the first superpolynomial lower bounds for learning one-layer neural networks with respect to the Gaussian distribution for a broad class of algorithms. In the regression setting, we prove that gradient descent run on any classifier with respect to square loss will fail to achieve small test error in polynomial time. Prior work held only for gradient descent run with small batch sizes and sufficiently smooth classifiers. For classification, we give a stronger result, namely that any statistical query (SQ) algorithm will fail to achieve small test error in polynomial time. Our lower bounds hold for commonly used activations such as ReLU and sigmoid. The core of our result relies on a novel construction of a simple family of neural networks that are exactly orthogonal with respect to all spherically symmetric distributions.
Surbhi Goel, Aravind Gollakota, Zhihan Jin, Sushrut Karmalkar, Adam R. Klivans
ICML2
2020 Statistical-Query Lower Bounds via Functional Gradients
abstract
We give the first statistical-query lower bounds for agnostically learning any non-polynomial activation with respect to Gaussian marginals (e.g., ReLU, sigmoid, sign). For the specific problem of ReLU regression (equivalently, agnostically learning a ReLU), we show that any statistical-query algorithm with tolerance $n^{-(1/\epsilon)^b}$ must use at least $2^{n^c} \epsilon$ queries for some constants $b, c > 0$, where $n$ is the dimension and $\epsilon$ is the accuracy parameter. Our results rule out {\em general} (as opposed to correlational) SQ learning algorithms, which is unusual for real-valued learning problems. Our techniques involve a gradient boosting procedure for ``amplifying'' recent lower bounds due to Diakonikolas et al.\ (COLT 2020) and Goel et al.\ (ICML 2020) on the SQ dimension of functions computed by two-layer neural networks. The crucial new ingredient is the use of a nonstandard convex functional during the boosting procedure. This also yields a best-possible reduction between two commonly studied models of learning: agnostic learning and probabilistic concepts.
Surbhi Goel, Aravind Gollakota, Adam R. Klivans
NeurIPS2