Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Enej Ilievski
dblp:331/8653
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
1 paper |
Learning theory · 80% Deep learning architectures and training · 20% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Grokking phase transitions in learning local rules with gradient descent · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › training dynamics
grokking |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Grokking phase transitions in learning local rules with gradient descent · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › online learning
perceptron |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Grokking phase transitions in learning local rules with gradient descent · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
phase transition |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Grokking phase transitions in learning local rules with gradient descent · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
statistical learning theory |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Grokking phase transitions in learning local rules with gradient descent · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
tensor network · 0.8gradient descent · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Grokking phase transitions in learning local rules with gradient descentabstractWe discuss two solvable grokking (generalisation beyond overfitting) models in a rule-learning scenario. We show that grokking is a phase transition and find exact analytic expressions for the critical exponents, grokking probability, and grokking time distribution. Further, we introduce a tensor network map that connects the proposed grokking setup with the standard (perceptron) statistical learning theory and provide evidence that grokking is a consequence of the locality of the teacher model. We analyze the rule-30 cellular automaton learning task, numerically determine the critical exponent and the grokking time distribution, and compare them with the prediction of the proposed grokking model. Finally, we numerically study the connection between structure formation and grokking. Bojan Zunkovic, Enej Ilievski |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 2 |