Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Lior Danon
dblp:322/9763
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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.
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization
convex optimization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Frank-Wolfe-based Algorithms for Approximating Tyler's M-estimator · NeurIPS 2022 |
Mathematical optimization
frank-wolfe algorithm |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Frank-Wolfe-based Algorithms for Approximating Tyler's M-estimator · NeurIPS 2022 |
Mathematical optimization › statistical estimation › covariance estimation
robust covariance estimation |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Frank-Wolfe-based Algorithms for Approximating Tyler's M-estimator · NeurIPS 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
geodesic frank-wolfe · 0.6away-steps · 0.6adaptive stepsizes · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Frank-Wolfe-based Algorithms for Approximating Tyler's M-estimatorabstractTyler's M-estimator is a well known procedure for robust and heavy-tailed covariance estimation. Tyler himself suggested an iterative fixed-point algorithm for computing his estimator however, it requires super-linear (in the size of the data) runtime per iteration, which maybe prohibitive in large scale. In this work we propose, to the best of our knowledge, the first Frank-Wolfe-based algorithms for computing Tyler's estimator. One variant uses standard Frank-Wolfe steps, the second also considers \textit{away-steps} (AFW), and the third is a \textit{geodesic} version of AFW (GAFW). AFW provably requires, up to a log factor, only linear time per iteration, while GAFW runs in linear time (up to a log factor) in a large $n$ (number of data-points) regime. All three variants are shown to provably converge to the optimal solution with sublinear rate, under standard assumptions, despite the fact that the underlying optimization problem is not convex nor smooth. Under an additional fairly mild assumption, that holds with probability 1 when the (normalized) data-points are i.i.d. samples from a continuous distribution supported on the entire unit sphere, AFW and GAFW are proved to converge with linear rates. Importantly, all three variants are parameter-free and use adaptive step-sizes. Lior Danon, Dan Garber |
NeurIPS | 1 |