Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Emma Rapoport
dblp:413/1745
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—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.
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Privacy and data protection · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Computational complexity · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Privacy and data protection › privacy-preserving query processing
adaptive query answering |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Tight Bounds for Answering Adaptively Chosen Concentrated Queries · NeurIPS 2025 |
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Tight Bounds for Answering Adaptively Chosen Concentrated Queries · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computational complexity › learning theory
adaptive data analysis |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Tight Bounds for Answering Adaptively Chosen Concentrated Queries · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computational complexity › learning theory
sample complexity |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Tight Bounds for Answering Adaptively Chosen Concentrated Queries · NeurIPS 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
lower bound arguments · 1.7concentration inequalities · 1.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Tight Bounds for Answering Adaptively Chosen Concentrated QueriesabstractMost work on adaptive data analysis assumes that samples in the dataset are independent. When correlations are allowed, even the non-adaptive setting can become intractable, unless some structural constraints are imposed. To address this, Bassily and Freund [2016] introduced the elegant framework of *concentrated queries*, which requires the analyst to restrict itself to queries that are concentrated around their expected value. While this assumption makes the problem trivial in the non-adaptive setting, in the adaptive setting it remains quite challenging. In fact, all known algorithms in this framework support significantly fewer queries than in the independent case: At most $O(n)$ queries for a sample of size $n$, compared to $O(n^2)$ in the independent setting.
In this work, we prove that this utility gap is inherent under the current formulation of the concentrated queries framework, assuming some natural conditions on the algorithm. Additionally, we present a simplified version of the best-known algorithms that match our impossibility result. Emma Rapoport, Edith Cohen, Uri Stemmer |
NeurIPS | 1 |