Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kevin Regan 0001
dblp:45/3653-1
· DBLP profile ↗
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
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
markov decision process |
0.4 | 3 | 2011 | 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 |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › loss function design
margin-based loss |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification · NeurIPS 2018 |
Mathematical optimization › online optimization
minimax regret |
0.2 | 2 | 2010 | 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 |
0.2 | 2 | 2010 | Simultaneous Elicitation of Preference Features and Utility · AAAI 2010 Online feature elicitation in interactive optimization · ICML 2009 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reward uncertainty |
0.1 | 2 | 2011 | 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 |
0.1 | 1 | 2011 | Robust Online Optimization of Reward-Uncertain MDPs · IJCAI 2011 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › online learning › regret bounds
minimax regret |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Robust Policy Computation in Reward-Uncertain MDPs Using Nondominated Policies · AAAI 2010 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
concept learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Simultaneous Elicitation of Preference Features and Utility · AAAI 2010 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | Large Margin Deep Networks for Classification · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
bayesian reinforcement learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | An analytic solution to discrete Bayesian reinforcement learning · ICML 2006 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › multi-agent environments
electronic marketplaces |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | Bayesian Reputation Modeling in E-Marketplaces Sensitive to Subjectivity, Deception and Change · AAAI 2006 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
model-based reinforcement learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | 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 |
0.0 | 1 | 2006 | 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
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Large Margin Deep Networks for ClassificationabstractWe 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 |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2011 | Eliciting Additive Reward Functions for Markov Decision Processes
Kevin Regan 0001, Craig Boutilier |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 2011 | Robust Online Optimization of Reward-Uncertain MDPs
Kevin Regan 0001, Craig Boutilier |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 2010 | Simultaneous Elicitation of Preference Features and UtilityabstractMost 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 |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2010 | Robust Policy Computation in Reward-Uncertain MDPs Using Nondominated PoliciesabstractThe 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 |
AAAI | 1 |
| 2009 | Online feature elicitation in interactive optimizationabstractMost 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 |
ICML | 2 |
| 2009 | Preference elicitation with subjective featuresabstractUtility 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 |
RecSys | 2 |
| 2009 | Regret-based Reward Elicitation for Markov Decision Processes
Kevin Regan 0001, Craig Boutilier |
UAI | 1 |
| 2006 | Bayesian Reputation Modeling in E-Marketplaces Sensitive to Subjectivity, Deception and Change
Kevin Regan 0001, Pascal Poupart, Robin Cohen |
AAAI | 1 |
| 2006 | An analytic solution to discrete Bayesian reinforcement learningabstractReinforcement 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 |
ICML | 4 |
| 2005 | The Advisor-POMDP: A Principled Approach to Trust through Reputation in Electronic Markets
Kevin Regan 0001, Robin Cohen, Pascal Poupart |
PST | 1 |