Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Michal Zawalski
dblp:300/4651
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 1 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.
| Artificial intelligence
3 papers |
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 60% Reinforcement learning · 23% Representation and self-supervised learning · 17% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
contrastive learning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Contrastive Representations for Temporal Reasoning · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
hierarchical reinforcement learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Fast and Precise: Adjusting Planning Horizon with Adaptive Subgoal Search · ICLR 2023 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › heuristic search
best-first search |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Subgoal Search For Complex Reasoning Tasks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
hierarchical search |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Subgoal Search For Complex Reasoning Tasks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › hierarchical reinforcement learning › option discovery
subgoal discovery |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Subgoal Search For Complex Reasoning Tasks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › hierarchical planning
subgoal planning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Subgoal Search For Complex Reasoning Tasks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
temporal contrastive learning · 0.9negative sampling · 0.9subgoal search · 0.7adaptive planning · 0.7transformer-based subgoal generation · 0.5best-first search · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Contrastive Representations for Temporal ReasoningabstractIn classical AI, perception relies on learning state-based representations, while planning --- temporal reasoning over action sequences ---
is typically achieved through search. We study whether such reasoning can instead emerge from representations that capture both perceptual and temporal structure. We show that standard temporal contrastive learning, despite its popularity, often fails to capture temporal structure due to its reliance on spurious features. To address this, we introduce Contrastive Representations for Temporal Reasoning (CRTR), a method that uses a negative sampling scheme to provably remove these spurious features and facilitate temporal reasoning. CRTR achieves strong results on domains with complex temporal structure, such as Sokoban and Rubik’s Cube. In particular, for the Rubik’s Cube, CRTR learns representations that generalize across all initial states and allow it to solve the puzzle using fewer search steps than BestFS — though with longer solutions. To our knowledge, this is the first method that efficiently solves arbitrary Cube states using only learned representations, without relying on an external search algorithm. Alicja Ziarko, Michal Bortkiewicz, Michal Zawalski, Benjamin Eysenbach, Piotr Milos |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2023 | Fast and Precise: Adjusting Planning Horizon with Adaptive Subgoal Search
Michal Zawalski, Michal Tyrolski, Konrad Czechowski, Tomasz Odrzygózdz, Damian Stachura, Piotr Piekos, Yuhuai Wu, Lukasz Kucinski, Piotr Milos |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2021 | Subgoal Search For Complex Reasoning TasksabstractHumans excel in solving complex reasoning tasks through a mental process of moving from one idea to a related one. Inspired by this, we propose Subgoal Search (kSubS) method. Its key component is a learned subgoal generator that produces a diversity of subgoals that are both achievable and closer to the solution. Using subgoals reduces the search space and induces a high-level search graph suitable for efficient planning. In this paper, we implement kSubS using a transformer-based subgoal module coupled with the classical best-first search framework. We show that a simple approach of generating $k$-th step ahead subgoals is surprisingly efficient on three challenging domains: two popular puzzle games, Sokoban and the Rubik's Cube, and an inequality proving benchmark INT. kSubS achieves strong results including state-of-the-art on INT within a modest computational budget. Konrad Czechowski, Tomasz Odrzygózdz, Marek Zbysinski, Michal Zawalski, Krzysztof Olejnik, Yuhuai Wu, Lukasz Kucinski, Piotr Milos |
NeurIPS | 4 |