Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Joshua Cutler
dblp:299/8179
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 first-author · 3 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.
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Optimization for machine learning · 67% Learning theory · 33% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Mathematical optimization
stochastic optimization |
1.4 | 2 | 2024 | Stochastic Approximation with Decision-Dependent Distributions: Asymptotic Normality and Optimality · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 Stochastic Optimization under Distributional Drift · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2023 |
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization › stochastic programming
decision-dependent distributions |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Stochastic Approximation with Decision-Dependent Distributions: Asymptotic Normality and Optimality · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization
stochastic approximation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Stochastic Approximation with Decision-Dependent Distributions: Asymptotic Normality and Optimality · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Mathematical optimization
convergence analysis |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Stochastic Optimization under Distributional Drift · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2023 |
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization
stochastic gradient methods |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Stochastic Optimization under Distributional Drift · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
convergence analysis |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Stochastic optimization under time drift: iterate averaging, step-decay schedules, and high probability guarantees · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization bounds
high probability bounds |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Stochastic optimization under time drift: iterate averaging, step-decay schedules, and high probability guarantees · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic optimization |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Stochastic optimization under time drift: iterate averaging, step-decay schedules, and high probability guarantees · NeurIPS 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
step decay schedule · 1.2proximal stochastic gradient · 1.2iterate averaging · 1.2stochastic approximation · 0.8minimax optimality · 0.8averaging · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Stochastic Approximation with Decision-Dependent Distributions: Asymptotic Normality and OptimalityabstractWe analyze a stochastic approximation algorithm for decision-dependent problems, wherein the data distribution used by the algorithm evolves along the iterate sequence. The primary examples of such problems appear in performative prediction and its multiplayer extensions. We show that under mild assumptions, the deviation between the average iterate of the algorithm and the solution is asymptotically normal, with a covariance that clearly decouples the effects of the gradient noise and the distributional shift. Moreover, building on the work of Hájek and Le Cam, we show that the asymptotic performance of the algorithm with averaging is locally minimax optimal. Joshua Cutler, Mateo Díaz, Dmitriy Drusvyatskiy |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 1 |
| 2023 | Stochastic Optimization under Distributional DriftabstractWe consider the problem of minimizing a convex function that is evolving according to unknown and possibly stochastic dynamics, which may depend jointly on time and on the decision variable itself. Such problems abound in the machine learning and signal processing literature, under the names of concept drift, stochastic tracking, and performative prediction. We provide novel non-asymptotic convergence guarantees for stochastic algorithms with iterate averaging, focusing on bounds valid both in expectation and with high probability. The efficiency estimates we obtain clearly decouple the contributions of optimization error, gradient noise, and time drift. Notably, we identify a low drift-to-noise regime in which the tracking efficiency of the proximal stochastic gradient method benefits significantly from a step decay schedule. Numerical experiments illustrate our results. Joshua Cutler, Dmitriy Drusvyatskiy, Zaïd Harchaoui |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 1 |
| 2021 | Stochastic optimization under time drift: iterate averaging, step-decay schedules, and high probability guaranteesabstractWe consider the problem of minimizing a convex function that is evolving in time according to unknown and possibly stochastic dynamics. Such problems abound in the machine learning and signal processing literature, under the names of concept drift and stochastic tracking. We provide novel non-asymptotic convergence guarantees for stochastic algorithms with iterate averaging, focusing on bounds valid both in expectation and with high probability. Notably, we show that the tracking efficiency of the proximal stochastic gradient method depends only logarithmically on the initialization quality when equipped with a step-decay schedule. Joshua Cutler, Dmitriy Drusvyatskiy, Zaïd Harchaoui |
NeurIPS | 1 |