Jennifer Gillenwater

dblp:73/3828 · also Jennifer A. Gillenwater · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
20ranked-venue papers
11as first author
6since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 18 · 9 first-author · 6 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author

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
10 papers
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 78% Efficient and distributed learning · 10% Information extraction and text analysis · 8%
Network and information security
3 papers
Privacy and data protection · 100%
Theoretical computer science
4 papers
Algorithms and data structures · 62% Mathematical optimization · 38%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
4 papers
Recommender systems · 47% Information retrieval · 29% Data mining · 14%

Topics — the 30 heaviest of 33, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy
1.732023
Better Private Linear Regression Through Better Private Feature Selection · NeurIPS 2023
A Joint Exponential Mechanism For Differentially Private Top-k · ICML 2022
Differentially Private Quantiles · ICML 2021
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › point process
determinantal point process
1.342022
Scalable Sampling for Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processes · ICLR 2022
Scalable Learning and MAP Inference for Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processes · ICLR 2021
Near-Optimal MAP Inference for Determinantal Point Processes · NIPS 2012
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › privacy mechanism design
exponential mechanism
1.122022
A Joint Exponential Mechanism For Differentially Private Top-k · ICML 2022
Differentially Private Quantiles · ICML 2021
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference
MAP inference
0.732021
Scalable Learning and MAP Inference for Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processes · ICLR 2021
Near-Optimal MAP Inference for Determinantal Point Processes · NIPS 2012
Maximizing Induced Cardinality Under a Determinantal Point Process · NeurIPS 2018
Recommender systems
diversified recommendation
0.722019
A Tree-Based Method for Fast Repeated Sampling of Determinantal Point Processes · ICML 2019
Maximizing Induced Cardinality Under a Determinantal Point Process · NeurIPS 2018
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › differentially private learning
differentially private linear regression
0.712023
Better Private Linear Regression Through Better Private Feature Selection · NeurIPS 2023
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › differentially private query answering
differentially private top-k selection
0.612022
A Joint Exponential Mechanism For Differentially Private Top-k · ICML 2022
Algorithms and data structures › randomized algorithms › sampling › determinantal point process
determinantal point process sampling
0.612022
Scalable Sampling for Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processes · ICLR 2022
Algorithms and data structures › randomized algorithms
sampling
0.612022
Scalable Sampling for Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processes · ICLR 2022
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
bayesian inference
0.512021
Federated Learning via Posterior Averaging: A New Perspective and Practical Algorithms · ICLR 2021
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
federated learning
0.512021
Federated Learning via Posterior Averaging: A New Perspective and Practical Algorithms · ICLR 2021
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › point process › determinantal point process
nonsymmetric determinantal point process
0.512021
Scalable Learning and MAP Inference for Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processes · ICLR 2021
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › posterior inference
posterior aggregation
0.512021
Federated Learning via Posterior Averaging: A New Perspective and Practical Algorithms · ICLR 2021
Mathematical optimization › submodular optimization
submodular maximization
0.522018
Maximizing Induced Cardinality Under a Determinantal Point Process · NeurIPS 2018
Near-Optimal MAP Inference for Determinantal Point Processes · NIPS 2012
Information retrieval
diversified retrieval
0.412019
A Tree-Based Method for Fast Repeated Sampling of Determinantal Point Processes · ICML 2019
Mathematical optimization
submodular optimization
0.212015
Submodular Hamming Metrics · NIPS 2015
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › parameter estimation
expectation-maximization
0.212014
Expectation-Maximization for Learning Determinantal Point Processes · NIPS 2014
Data stream processing
quantile estimation
0.112021
Differentially Private Quantiles · ICML 2021
Data mining › statistical analysis
statistical summary
0.112021
Differentially Private Quantiles · ICML 2021
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › text summarization
document summarization
0.112012
Discovering Diverse and Salient Threads in Document Collections · EMNLP-CoNLL 2012
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
topic model
0.112012
Discovering Diverse and Salient Threads in Document Collections · EMNLP-CoNLL 2012
Mathematical optimization › relaxation
continuous relaxation
0.112012
Near-Optimal MAP Inference for Determinantal Point Processes · NIPS 2012
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › syntactic parsing
dependency parsing
0.112011
Posterior Sparsity in Unsupervised Dependency Parsing · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2011
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › syntactic parsing › dependency parsing
unsupervised dependency parsing
0.112011
Posterior Sparsity in Unsupervised Dependency Parsing · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2011
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › latent variable model
latent structure discovery
0.112010
Posterior Regularization for Structured Latent Variable Models · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2010
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › approximate bayesian inference
posterior regularization
0.112010
Posterior Regularization for Structured Latent Variable Models · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2010
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › grammar induction
dependency grammar induction
0.112009
Dependency Grammar Induction via Bitext Projection Constraints · ACL/IJCNLP 2009
Data mining
clustering
0.112015
Submodular Hamming Metrics · NIPS 2015
Information retrieval › ranking › learning to rank
metric optimization
0.112015
Submodular Hamming Metrics · NIPS 2015
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
graphical models
0.012012
Near-Optimal MAP Inference for Determinantal Point Processes · NIPS 2012

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

greedy algorithm · 1.3scalable sampling · 1.1markov chain monte carlo · 1.1utility function design · 1.0exponential mechanism · 1.0efficient implementation · 1.0submodular approximation · 1.0kendall rank correlation · 0.7feature selection · 0.7approximation algorithm · 0.6sampling algorithm · 0.6joint exponential mechanism · 0.6scalable learning · 0.5posterior averaging · 0.5federated learning · 0.5determinantal point process · 0.5MAP inference · 0.5submodular function optimization · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Better Private Linear Regression Through Better Private Feature Selection
abstract
Existing work on differentially private linear regression typically assumes that end users can precisely set data bounds or algorithmic hyperparameters. End users often struggle to meet these requirements without directly examining the data (and violating privacy). Recent work has attempted to develop solutions that shift these burdens from users to algorithms, but they struggle to provide utility as the feature dimension grows. This work extends these algorithms to higher-dimensional problems by introducing a differentially private feature selection method based on Kendall rank correlation. We prove a utility guarantee for the setting where features are normally distributed and conduct experiments across 25 datasets. We find that adding this private feature selection step before regression significantly broadens the applicability of ``plug-and-play'' private linear regression algorithms at little additional cost to privacy, computation, or decision-making by the end user.
Travis Dick, Jennifer Gillenwater, Matthew Joseph
NeurIPS2
2022 Scalable Sampling for Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processes
Insu Han, Mike Gartrell, Jennifer Gillenwater, Elvis Dohmatob, Amin Karbasi
ICLR3
2022 A Joint Exponential Mechanism For Differentially Private Top-k
abstract
We present a differentially private algorithm for releasing the sequence of $k$ elements with the highest counts from a data domain of $d$ elements. The algorithm is a "joint" instance of the exponential mechanism, and its output space consists of all $O(d^k)$ length-$k$ sequences. Our main contribution is a method to sample this exponential mechanism in time $O(dk\log(k) + d\log(d))$ and space $O(dk)$. Experiments show that this approach outperforms existing pure differential privacy methods and improves upon even approximate differential privacy methods for moderate $k$.
Jennifer Gillenwater, Matthew Joseph, Andrés Muñoz Medina, Mónica Ribero
ICML1
2021 Federated Learning via Posterior Averaging: A New Perspective and Practical Algorithms
Maruan Al-Shedivat, Jennifer Gillenwater, Eric P. Xing, Afshin Rostamizadeh
ICLR2
2021 Scalable Learning and MAP Inference for Nonsymmetric Determinantal Point Processes
Mike Gartrell, Insu Han, Elvis Dohmatob, Jennifer Gillenwater, Victor-Emmanuel Brunel
ICLR4
2021 Differentially Private Quantiles
abstract
Quantiles are often used for summarizing and understanding data. If that data is sensitive, it may be necessary to compute quantiles in a way that is differentially private, providing theoretical guarantees that the result does not reveal private information. However, when multiple quantiles are needed, existing differentially private algorithms fare poorly: they either compute quantiles individually, splitting the privacy budget, or summarize the entire distribution, wasting effort. In either case the result is reduced accuracy. In this work we propose an instance of the exponential mechanism that simultaneously estimates exactly $m$ quantiles from $n$ data points while guaranteeing differential privacy. The utility function is carefully structured to allow for an efficient implementation that returns estimates of all $m$ quantiles in time $O(mn\log(n) + m^2n)$. Experiments show that our method significantly outperforms the current state of the art on both real and synthetic data while remaining efficient enough to be practical.
Jennifer Gillenwater, Matthew Joseph, Alex Kulesza
ICML1
2020 MAP Inference for Customized Determinantal Point Processes via Maximum Inner Product Search
abstract
Determinantal point processes (DPPs) are a good fit for modeling diversity in many machine learning applications. For instance, in recommender systems, one might have a basic DPP defined by item features, and a customized version of this DPP for each user with features re-weighted according to user preferences. While such models perform well, they are typically applied only to relatively small datasets, because existing maximum a posteriori (MAP) approximation algorithms are expensive. In this work, we propose a new MAP algorithm: we show that, by performing a one-time preprocessing step on a basic DPP, it is possible to run an approximate version of the standard greedy MAP approximation algorithm on any customized version of the DPP in time sublinear in the number of items. Our key observation is that the core computation can be written as a maximum inner product search (MIPS), which allows us to accelerate inference via approximate MIPS structures, e.g., trees or hash tables. We provide a theoretical analysis of the algorithm’s approximation quality, as well as empirical results on real-world datasets demonstrating that it is often orders of magnitude faster while sacrificing little accuracy.
Insu Han, Jennifer Gillenwater
AISTATS2
2019 A Tree-Based Method for Fast Repeated Sampling of Determinantal Point Processes
abstract
It is often desirable in recommender systems and other information retrieval applications to provide diverse results, and determinantal point processes (DPPs) have become a popular way to capture the trade-off between the quality of individual results and the diversity of the overall set. However, sampling from a DPP is inherently expensive: if the underlying collection contains N items, then generating each DPP sample requires time linear in N following a one-time preprocessing phase. Additionally, results often need to be personalized to a user, but standard approaches to personalization invalidate the preprocessing, making personalized samples especially expensive. In this work we address both of these shortcomings. First, we propose a new algorithm for generating DPP samples in time logarithmic in N, following a slightly more expensive preprocessing phase. We then extend the algorithm to support arbitrary query-time feature weights, allowing us to generate samples customized to individual users while still retaining logarithmic runtime; experiments show our approach runs over 300 times faster than traditional DPP sampling on collections of 100,000 items for samples of size 10.
Jennifer Gillenwater, Alex Kulesza, Zelda Mariet, Sergei Vassilvitskii
ICML1
2018 Practical Diversified Recommendations on YouTube with Determinantal Point Processes
abstract
Many recommendation systems produce result sets with large numbers of highly similar items. Diversifying these results is often accomplished with heuristics, which are impoverished models of users' desire for diversity. However, integrating more complex statistical models of diversity into large-scale, mature systems is challenging. Without a good match between the model's definition of diversity and users' perception of diversity, the model can easily degrade users' perception of the recommendations. In this work we present a statistical model of diversity based on determinantal point processes (DPPs). We train this model from examples of user preferences with a simple procedure that can be integrated into large and complex production systems relatively easily. We use an approximate inference algorithm to serve the model at scale, and empirical results on live YouTube homepage traffic show that this model, coupled with a re-ranking algorithm, yields substantial short- and long-term increases in user engagement.
Mark Wilhelm, Ajith Ramanathan, Alexander Bonomo, Sagar Jain, Ed H. Chi, Jennifer Gillenwater
CIKM6
2018 Maximizing Induced Cardinality Under a Determinantal Point Process
abstract
Determinantal point processes (DPPs) are well-suited to recommender systems where the goal is to generate collections of diverse, high-quality items. In the existing literature this is usually formulated as finding the mode of the DPP (the so-called MAP set). However, the MAP objective inherently assumes that the DPP models "optimal" recommendation sets, and yet obtaining such a DPP is nontrivial when there is no ready source of example optimal sets. In this paper we advocate an alternative framework for applying DPPs to recommender systems. Our approach assumes that the DPP simply models user engagements with recommended items, which is more consistent with how DPPs for recommender systems are typically trained. With this assumption, we are able to formulate a metric that measures the expected number of items that a user will engage with. We formalize this optimization of this metric as the Maximum Induced Cardinality (MIC) problem. Although the MIC objective is not submodular, we show that it can be approximated by a submodular function, and that empirically it is well-optimized by a greedy algorithm.
Jennifer Gillenwater, Alex Kulesza, Sergei Vassilvitskii, Zelda Mariet
NeurIPS1
2015 Submodular Hamming Metrics
abstract
We show that there is a largely unexplored class of functions (positive polymatroids) that can define proper discrete metrics over pairs of binary vectors and that are fairly tractable to optimize over. By exploiting submodularity, we are able to give hardness results and approximation algorithms for optimizing over such metrics. Additionally, we demonstrate empirically the effectiveness of these metrics and associated algorithms on both a metric minimization task (a form of clustering) and also a metric maximization task (generating diverse k-best lists).
Jennifer Gillenwater, Rishabh Iyer 0001, Bethany Lusch, Rahul Kidambi, Jeff A. Bilmes
NIPS1
2014 Expectation-Maximization for Learning Determinantal Point Processes
Jennifer Gillenwater, Alex Kulesza, Emily B. Fox, Ben Taskar
NIPS1
2013 Graph-Based Posterior Regularization for Semi-Supervised Structured Prediction
Luheng He, Jennifer Gillenwater, Ben Taskar
CoNLL2
2013 End-to-end learning of parsing models for information retrieval
abstract
Parsers have been shown to be helpful in information retrieval tasks because they are able to model long-span word dependencies efficiently. While previous work focused on using traditional syntactic parse trees, this paper proposes a new approach where, unlike previous work, the parser parameters are discriminatively trained to directly optimize a non-convex and non-smooth IR measure. The relevance between a document and a query is then modeled by the weighted tree edit distance between their parses. We evaluate our method on a large scale web search task consisting of a real world query set. Results show that the new parser is more effective for document retrieval than using traditional syntactic parse trees. It gives significant improvement, especially for long queries where proper modeling of long-span dependencies is crucial.
Jennifer Gillenwater, Xiaodong He 0001, Jianfeng Gao 0001, Li Deng 0001
ICASSP1
2012 Discovering Diverse and Salient Threads in Document Collections
Jennifer Gillenwater, Alex Kulesza, Ben Taskar
EMNLP-CoNLL1
2012 Near-Optimal MAP Inference for Determinantal Point Processes
abstract
Determinantal point processes (DPPs) have recently been proposed as computationally efficient probabilistic models of diverse sets for a variety of applications, including document summarization, image search, and pose estimation. Many DPP inference operations, including normalization and sampling, are tractable; however, finding the most likely configuration (MAP), which is often required in practice for decoding, is NP-hard, so we must resort to approximate inference. Because DPP probabilities are log-submodular, greedy algorithms have been used in the past with some empirical success; however, these methods only give approximation guarantees in the special case of DPPs with monotone kernels. In this paper we propose a new algorithm for approximating the MAP problem based on continuous techniques for submodular function maximization. Our method involves a novel continuous relaxation of the log-probability function, which, in contrast to the multilinear extension used for general submodular functions, can be evaluated and differentiated exactly and efficiently. We obtain a practical algorithm with a 1/4-approximation guarantee for a general class of non-monotone DPPs. Our algorithm also extends to MAP inference under complex polytope constraints, making it possible to combine DPPs with Markov random fields, weighted matchings, and other models. We demonstrate that our approach outperforms greedy methods on both synthetic and real-world data.
Jennifer Gillenwater, Alex Kulesza, Ben Taskar
NIPS1
2011 Posterior Sparsity in Unsupervised Dependency Parsing
Jennifer Gillenwater, Kuzman Ganchev, João Graça, Fernando Pereira 0003, Ben Taskar
J. Mach. Learn. Res.1
2010 Posterior Regularization for Structured Latent Variable Models
Kuzman Ganchev, João Graça, Jennifer Gillenwater, Ben Taskar
J. Mach. Learn. Res.3
2009 Dependency Grammar Induction via Bitext Projection Constraints
Kuzman Ganchev, Jennifer Gillenwater, Ben Taskar
ACL/IJCNLP2
2008 Synthesizable high level hardware descriptions: using statically typed two-level languages to guarantee verilog synthesizability
abstract
Modern hardware description languages support code-generation constructs like generate/endgenerate in Verilog. These constructs are intended to describe regular or parameterized hardware designs and, when used effectively, can make hardware descriptions shorter, more understandable, and more reusable. In practice, however, designers avoid these constructs because it is difficult to understand and predict the properties of the generated code. Is the generated code even type safe? Is it synthesizable? What physical resources (e.g. combinatorial gates and flip-flops) does it require? It is often impossible to answer these questions without first generating the fully-expanded code. In the Verilog and VHDL communities, this generation process is referred to as elaboration.
Jennifer Gillenwater, Gregory Malecha, Cherif R. Salama, Angela Yun Zhu, Walid Taha, Jim Grundy, John O'Leary
PEPM1