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

Pawan Kumar Mudigonda

dblp:87/5298 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 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.

Artificial intelligence
3 papers
Optimization for machine learning · 40% Learning paradigms · 20% Graph learning · 9%
Theoretical computer science
3 papers
Mathematical optimization · 61% Automated reasoning and model checking · 35% Information theory · 4%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Program verification · 57% Programming languages and type systems · 43%

Topics — the 19 heaviest of 21, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
multi-task learning
0.612022
In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
multi-task optimization
0.612022
In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
scalarization
0.612022
In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning · NeurIPS 2022
Mathematical optimization › discrete optimization › mixed integer linear programming › branching
learning to branch
0.412020
Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch · NeurIPS 2020
Mathematical optimization › discrete optimization
mixed integer linear programming
0.412020
Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch · NeurIPS 2020
Program verification
neural network verification
0.312018
A Unified View of Piecewise Linear Neural Network Verification · NeurIPS 2018
Automated reasoning and model checking
neural network verification
0.312018
A Unified View of Piecewise Linear Neural Network Verification · NeurIPS 2018
Automated reasoning and model checking
satisfiability modulo theories
0.312018
A Unified View of Piecewise Linear Neural Network Verification · NeurIPS 2018
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
deep probabilistic models
0.212016
DISCO Nets : DISsimilarity COefficients Networks · NIPS 2016
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation
0.212016
DISCO Nets : DISsimilarity COefficients Networks · NIPS 2016
Programming languages and type systems › programming paradigms
differentiable programming
0.212016
Adaptive Neural Compilation · NIPS 2016
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-task reinforcement learning
0.212022
In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph neural network
0.112020
Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch · NeurIPS 2020
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
graph neural networks for combinatorial optimization
0.112020
Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch · NeurIPS 2020
Mathematical optimization
convex relaxation
0.112007
An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007
Mathematical optimization
discrete optimization
0.112007
An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007
Mathematical optimization
linear programming relaxation
0.112007
An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007
Information theory › estimation theory › bayesian estimation
MAP inference
0.112007
An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007
Mathematical optimization › convex relaxation
semidefinite relaxation
0.112007
An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007

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

multi-layer perceptron · 0.9graph neural network · 0.9branch-and-bound · 0.9satisfiability modulo theories · 0.7formal methods · 0.7regularization · 0.6gradient analysis · 0.6neural network · 0.5gradient-based optimization · 0.2dissimilarity coefficient · 0.2second-order cone programming · 0.1linear programming · 0.1convex relaxation · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning
abstract
Recent multi-task learning research argues against unitary scalarization, where training simply minimizes the sum of the task losses. Several ad-hoc multi-task optimization algorithms have instead been proposed, inspired by various hypotheses about what makes multi-task settings difficult. The majority of these optimizers require per-task gradients, and introduce significant memory, runtime, and implementation overhead. We show that unitary scalarization, coupled with standard regularization and stabilization techniques from single-task learning, matches or improves upon the performance of complex multi-task optimizers in popular supervised and reinforcement learning settings. We then present an analysis suggesting that many specialized multi-task optimizers can be partly interpreted as forms of regularization, potentially explaining our surprising results. We believe our results call for a critical reevaluation of recent research in the area.
Vitaly Kurin, Alessandro De Palma, Ilya Kostrikov, Shimon Whiteson, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda
NeurIPS5
2020 Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch
abstract
A recent Graph Neural Network (GNN) approach for learning to branch has been shown to successfully reduce the running time of branch-and-bound algorithms for Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP). While the GNN relies on a GPU for inference, MILP solvers are purely CPU-based. This severely limits its application as many practitioners may not have access to high-end GPUs. In this work, we ask two key questions. First, in a more realistic setting where only a CPU is available, is the GNN model still competitive? Second, can we devise an alternate computationally inexpensive model that retains the predictive power of the GNN architecture? We answer the first question in the negative, and address the second question by proposing a new hybrid architecture for efficient branching on CPU machines. The proposed architecture combines the expressive power of GNNs with computationally inexpensive multi-layer perceptrons (MLP) for branching. We evaluate our methods on four classes of MILP problems, and show that they lead to up to 26% reduction in solver running time compared to state-of-the-art methods without a GPU, while extrapolating to harder problems than it was trained on. The code for this project is publicly available at https://github.com/pg2455/Hybrid-learn2branch.
Prateek Gupta, Maxime Gasse, Elias B. Khalil, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda, Andrea Lodi 0001, Yoshua Bengio
NeurIPS4
2018 A Unified View of Piecewise Linear Neural Network Verification
abstract
The success of Deep Learning and its potential use in many safety-critical applications has motivated research on formal verification of Neural Network (NN) models. Despite the reputation of learned NN models to behave as black boxes and the theoretical hardness of proving their properties, researchers have been successful in verifying some classes of models by exploiting their piecewise linear structure and taking insights from formal methods such as Satisifiability Modulo Theory. These methods are however still far from scaling to realistic neural networks. To facilitate progress on this crucial area, we make two key contributions. First, we present a unified framework that encompasses previous methods. This analysis results in the identification of new methods that combine the strengths of multiple existing approaches, accomplishing a speedup of two orders of magnitude compared to the previous state of the art. Second, we propose a new data set of benchmarks which includes a collection of previously released testcases. We use the benchmark to provide the first experimental comparison of existing algorithms and identify the factors impacting the hardness of verification problems.
Rudy Bunel, Ilker Turkaslan, Philip Torr 0001, Pushmeet Kohli, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda
NeurIPS5
2016 DISCO Nets : DISsimilarity COefficients Networks
abstract
We present a new type of probabilistic model which we call DISsimilarity COefficient Networks (DISCO Nets). DISCO Nets allow us to efficiently sample from a posterior distribution parametrised by a neural network. During training, DISCO Nets are learned by minimising the dissimilarity coefficient between the true distribution and the estimated distribution. This allows us to tailor the training to the loss related to the task at hand. We empirically show that (i) by modeling uncertainty on the output value, DISCO Nets outperform equivalent non-probabilistic predictive networks and (ii) DISCO Nets accurately model the uncertainty of the output, outperforming existing probabilistic models based on deep neural networks.
Diane Bouchacourt, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda, Sebastian Nowozin
NIPS2
2016 Adaptive Neural Compilation
abstract
This paper proposes an adaptive neural-compilation framework to address the problem of learning efficient program. Traditional code optimisation strategies used in compilers are based on applying pre-specified set of transformations that make the code faster to execute without changing its semantics. In contrast, our work involves adapting programs to make them more efficient while considering correctness only on a target input distribution. Our approach is inspired by the recent works on differentiable representations of programs. We show that it is possible to compile programs written in a low-level language to a differentiable representation. We also show how programs in this representation can be optimised to make them efficient on a target distribution of inputs. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach enables learning specifically-tuned algorithms for given data distributions with a high success rate.
Rudy Bunel, Alban Desmaison, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda, Pushmeet Kohli, Philip Torr 0001
NIPS3
2007 An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation
abstract
The problem of obtaining the maximum a posteriori estimate of a general discrete random field (i.e. a random field defined using a finite and discrete set of labels) is known to be N P-hard. However, due to its central importance in many applications, several approximate algorithms have been proposed in the literature. In this paper, we present an analysis of three such algorithms based on convex relaxations: (i) L P - S: the linear programming (L P) relaxation proposed by Schlesinger [20] for a special case and independently in [4, 12, 23] for the general case; (ii) Q P - R L: the quadratic programming (Q P) relaxation by Ravikumar and Lafferty [18]; and (iii) S O C P - M S: the second order cone programming (S O C P) relaxation first proposed by Muramatsu and Suzuki [16] for two label problems and later extended in [14] for a general label set. We show that the S O C P - M S and the Q P - R L relaxations are equivalent. Furthermore, we prove that despite the flexibility in the form of the constraints/objective function offered by Q P and S O C P, the L P - S relaxation strictly dominates (i.e. provides a better approximation than) Q P - R L and S O C P - M S. We generalize these results by defining a large class of S O C P (and equivalent Q P) relaxations which is dominated by the L P - S relaxation. Based on these results we propose some novel S O C P relaxations which strictly dominate the previous approaches.
Pawan Kumar Mudigonda, Vladimir Kolmogorov, Philip Torr 0001
NIPS1