Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Kevin Regan 0001

dblp:45/3653-1 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
11ranked-venue papers
6as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 9 · 5 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 5 · 4 first-authorSecurity and privacy · 1 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1

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
6 papers
Trustworthy machine learning · 32% Reinforcement learning · 31% Deep learning architectures and training · 16%
Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 40% Mathematical optimization · 40% Automated reasoning and model checking · 21%

Topics — the 15 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
markov decision process
0.432011
Robust Online Optimization of Reward-Uncertain MDPs · IJCAI 2011
Eliciting Additive Reward Functions for Markov Decision Processes · IJCAI 2011
Robust Policy Computation in Reward-Uncertain MDPs Using Nondominated Policies · AAAI 2010
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
adversarial robustness
0.312018
Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification · NeurIPS 2018
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › loss function design
margin-based loss
0.312018
Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification · NeurIPS 2018
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.312018
Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification · NeurIPS 2018
Mathematical optimization › online optimization
minimax regret
0.222010
Simultaneous Elicitation of Preference Features and Utility · AAAI 2010
Online feature elicitation in interactive optimization · ICML 2009
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › information elicitation
utility elicitation
0.222010
Simultaneous Elicitation of Preference Features and Utility · AAAI 2010
Online feature elicitation in interactive optimization · ICML 2009
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reward uncertainty
0.122011
Robust Policy Computation in Reward-Uncertain MDPs Using Nondominated Policies · AAAI 2010
Robust Online Optimization of Reward-Uncertain MDPs · IJCAI 2011
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
robust optimization
0.112011
Robust Online Optimization of Reward-Uncertain MDPs · IJCAI 2011
Machine learning › Learning theory › online learning › regret bounds
minimax regret
0.112010
Robust Policy Computation in Reward-Uncertain MDPs Using Nondominated Policies · AAAI 2010
Automated reasoning and model checking
concept learning
0.112010
Simultaneous Elicitation of Preference Features and Utility · AAAI 2010
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization
0.112018
Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification · NeurIPS 2018
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
bayesian reinforcement learning
0.112006
An analytic solution to discrete Bayesian reinforcement learning · ICML 2006
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › multi-agent environments
electronic marketplaces
0.112006
Bayesian Reputation Modeling in E-Marketplaces Sensitive to Subjectivity, Deception and Change · AAAI 2006
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
model-based reinforcement learning
0.112006
An analytic solution to discrete Bayesian reinforcement learning · ICML 2006
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › planning under uncertainty
partially observable markov decision process
0.012006
An analytic solution to discrete Bayesian reinforcement learning · ICML 2006

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

ℓp-norm regularization · 0.3margin maximization · 0.3dropout · 0.3data augmentation · 0.3batch normalization · 0.3minimax regret · 0.2concept learning · 0.2online optimization · 0.1additive utility models · 0.1witness algorithm · 0.1nondominated policies · 0.1heuristic query strategies · 0.1POMDP value functions · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2018 Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification
abstract
We present a formulation of deep learning that aims at producing a large margin classifier. The notion of \emc{margin}, minimum distance to a decision boundary, has served as the foundation of several theoretically profound and empirically successful results for both classification and regression tasks. However, most large margin algorithms are applicable only to shallow models with a preset feature representation; and conventional margin methods for neural networks only enforce margin at the output layer. Such methods are therefore not well suited for deep networks. In this work, we propose a novel loss function to impose a margin on any chosen set of layers of a deep network (including input and hidden layers). Our formulation allows choosing any $l_p$ norm ($p \geq 1$) on the metric measuring the margin. We demonstrate that the decision boundary obtained by our loss has nice properties compared to standard classification loss functions. Specifically, we show improved empirical results on the MNIST, CIFAR-10 and ImageNet datasets on multiple tasks: generalization from small training sets, corrupted labels, and robustness against adversarial perturbations. The resulting loss is general and complementary to existing data augmentation (such as random/adversarial input transform) and regularization techniques such as weight decay, dropout, and batch norm. \footnote{Code for the large margin loss function is released at \url{https://github.com/google-research/google-research/tree/master/large_margin}}
Gamaleldin F. Elsayed, Dilip Krishnan, Hossein Mobahi, Kevin Regan 0001, Samy Bengio
NeurIPS4
2011 Eliciting Additive Reward Functions for Markov Decision Processes
Kevin Regan 0001, Craig Boutilier
IJCAI1
2011 Robust Online Optimization of Reward-Uncertain MDPs
Kevin Regan 0001, Craig Boutilier
IJCAI1
2010 Simultaneous Elicitation of Preference Features and Utility
abstract
Most frameworks for utility elicitation assume a predefined set of features over which user preferences are expressed. We consider utility elicitation in the presence of subjective or user-defined features, whose definitions are not known in advance. We treat the problem of learning a user's feature definition as one of concept learning, but whose goal is to learn only enough about the concept definition to enable a good decision to be made. This is complicated by the fact that user utility is unknown. We describe computational procedures for identifying optimal alternatives w.r.t minimax regret in the presence of both utility and concept uncertainty; and develop several heuristic query strategies that focus simultaneously on reduction of relevant concept and utility uncertainty.
Craig Boutilier, Kevin Regan 0001, Paolo Viappiani
AAAI2
2010 Robust Policy Computation in Reward-Uncertain MDPs Using Nondominated Policies
abstract
The precise specification of reward functions for Markov decision processes (MDPs) is often extremely difficult, motivating research into both reward elicitation and the robust solution of MDPs with imprecisely specified reward (IRMDPs). We develop new techniques for the robust optimization of IRMDPs, using the minimax regret decision criterion, that exploit the set of nondominated policies, i.e., policies that are optimal for some instantiation of the imprecise reward function. Drawing parallels to POMDP value functions, we devise a Witness-style algorithm for identifying nondominated policies. We also examine several new algorithms for computing minimax regret using the nondominated set, and examine both practically and theoretically the impact of approximating this set. Our results suggest that a small subset of the nondominated set can greatly speed up computation, yet yield very tight approximations to minimax regret.
Kevin Regan 0001, Craig Boutilier
AAAI1
2009 Online feature elicitation in interactive optimization
abstract
Most models of utility elicitation in decision support and interactive optimization assume a predefined set of "catalog" features over which user preferences are expressed. However, users may differ in the features over which they are most comfortable expressing their preferences. In this work we consider the problem of feature elicitation: a user's utility function is expressed using features whose definitions (in terms of "catalog" features) are unknown. We cast this as a problem of concept learning, but whose goal is to identify only enough about the concept to enable a good decision to be recommended. We describe computational procedures for identifying optimal alternatives w.r.t. minimax regret in the presence of concept uncertainty; and describe several heuristic query strategies that focus on reduction of relevant concept uncertainty.
Craig Boutilier, Kevin Regan 0001, Paolo Viappiani
ICML2
2009 Preference elicitation with subjective features
abstract
Utility or preference elicitation is a critical component in many recommender and decision support systems. However, most frameworks for elicitation assume a predefined set of features (e.g., as derived from catalog descriptions) over which user preferences are expressed. Just as user preferences vary considerably, so too can the features over which they are most comfortable expressing these preferences. In this work, we consider preference elicitation in the presence of subjective or user-defined features. We treat the problem of learning a user's feature definition as one of concept learning, but whose goal is to learn only enough about the concept definition to enable a good decision to be made. This is complicated by the fact that user preferences are unknown. We describe computational procedures for identifying optimal alternatives w.r.t minimax regret in the presence of both utility and concept uncertainty; and develop several heuristic query strategies that focus on reduction of relevant concept and utility uncertainty. Computational experiments verify the efficacy of these strategies.
Craig Boutilier, Kevin Regan 0001, Paolo Viappiani
RecSys2
2009 Regret-based Reward Elicitation for Markov Decision Processes
Kevin Regan 0001, Craig Boutilier
UAI1
2006 Bayesian Reputation Modeling in E-Marketplaces Sensitive to Subjectivity, Deception and Change
Kevin Regan 0001, Pascal Poupart, Robin Cohen
AAAI1
2006 An analytic solution to discrete Bayesian reinforcement learning
abstract
Reinforcement learning (RL) was originally proposed as a framework to allow agents to learn in an online fashion as they interact with their environment. Existing RL algorithms come short of achieving this goal because the amount of exploration required is often too costly and/or too time consuming for online learning. As a result, RL is mostly used for offline learning in simulated environments. We propose a new algorithm, called BEETLE, for effective online learning that is computationally efficient while minimizing the amount of exploration. We take a Bayesian model-based approach, framing RL as a partially observable Markov decision process. Our two main contributions are the analytical derivation that the optimal value function is the upper envelope of a set of multivariate polynomials, and an efficient point-based value iteration algorithm that exploits this simple parameterization.
Pascal Poupart, Nikos Vlassis, Jesse Hoey, Kevin Regan 0001
ICML4
2005 The Advisor-POMDP: A Principled Approach to Trust through Reputation in Electronic Markets
Kevin Regan 0001, Robin Cohen, Pascal Poupart
PST1