Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Saeed Ghadimi
dblp:124/6563
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
0as first author
4since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 4 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.
| Theoretical computer science
4 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Optimization for machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 12 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Mathematical optimization
stochastic optimization |
1.1 | 2 | 2022 | A Projection-free Algorithm for Constrained Stochastic Multi-level Composition Optimization · NeurIPS 2022 Constrained Stochastic Nonconvex Optimization with State-dependent Markov Data · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › black-box optimization
zeroth-order optimization |
0.9 | 2 | 2022 | Stochastic Zeroth-Order Optimization under Nonstationarity and Nonconvexity · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022 Zeroth-order (Non)-Convex Stochastic Optimization via Conditional Gradient and Gradient Updates · NeurIPS 2018 |
Mathematical optimization
nonconvex optimization |
0.8 | 2 | 2020 | Escaping Saddle-Point Faster under Interpolation-like Conditions · NeurIPS 2020 Zeroth-order (Non)-Convex Stochastic Optimization via Conditional Gradient and Gradient Updates · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
non-convex optimization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Stochastic Zeroth-Order Optimization under Nonstationarity and Nonconvexity · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › non-convex optimization
saddle point escape |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Stochastic Zeroth-Order Optimization under Nonstationarity and Nonconvexity · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022 |
Mathematical optimization
constrained optimization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | A Projection-free Algorithm for Constrained Stochastic Multi-level Composition Optimization · NeurIPS 2022 |
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization › compositional optimization
stochastic compositional optimization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | A Projection-free Algorithm for Constrained Stochastic Multi-level Composition Optimization · NeurIPS 2022 |
Mathematical optimization › nonconvex optimization
saddle point escape |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Escaping Saddle-Point Faster under Interpolation-like Conditions · NeurIPS 2020 |
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization › stochastic gradient methods
stochastic gradient descent |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Escaping Saddle-Point Faster under Interpolation-like Conditions · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic optimization |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Zeroth-order (Non)-Convex Stochastic Optimization via Conditional Gradient and Gradient Updates · NeurIPS 2018 |
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization › convex optimization › first-order methods
conditional gradient method |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Zeroth-order (Non)-Convex Stochastic Optimization via Conditional Gradient and Gradient Updates · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › sparse learning
sparse optimization |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | Zeroth-order (Non)-Convex Stochastic Optimization via Conditional Gradient and Gradient Updates · NeurIPS 2018 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
conditional gradient · 1.2stochastic first-order oracle · 1.1zeroth-order approximation · 0.7stochastic gradient descent · 0.7regret analysis · 0.6projection-free algorithms · 0.6projection-based algorithm · 0.6linear minimization oracle · 0.6gaussian stein's identity · 0.6cubic-regularized newton's method · 0.6zeroth-order optimization · 0.4stochastic optimization · 0.4perturbation · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | A one-sample decentralized proximal algorithm for non-convex stochastic composite optimizationabstractWe focus on decentralized stochastic non-convex optimization, where $n$ agents work together to optimize a composite objective function which is a sum of a smooth term and a non-smooth convex term. To solve this problem, we propose two single-time scale algorithms: \texttt{Prox-DASA} and \texttt{Prox-DASA-GT}. These algorithms can find $\epsilon$-stationary points in $\mathcal{O}(n^{-1}\epsilon^{-2})$ iterations using constant batch sizes (i.e., $\mathcal{O}(1)$). Unlike prior work, our algorithms achieve comparable complexity without requiring large batch sizes, more complex per-iteration operations (such as double loops), or stronger assumptions. Our theoretical findings are supported by extensive numerical experiments, which demonstrate the superiority of our algorithms over previous approaches. Our code is available at \url{https://github.com/xuxingc/ProxDASA}. Tesi Xiao, Xuxing Chen, Krishnakumar Balasubramanian 0002, Saeed Ghadimi |
UAI | 4 |
| 2022 | Constrained Stochastic Nonconvex Optimization with State-dependent Markov DataabstractWe study stochastic optimization algorithms for constrained nonconvex stochastic optimization problems with Markovian data. In particular, we focus on the case when the transition kernel of the Markov chain is state-dependent. Such stochastic optimization problems arise in various machine learning problems including strategic classification and reinforcement learning. For this problem, we study both projection-based and projection-free algorithms. In both cases, we establish that the number of calls to the stochastic first-order oracle to obtain an appropriately defined $\epsilon$-stationary point is of the order $\mathcal{O}(1/\epsilon^{2.5})$. In the projection-free setting we additionally establish that the number of calls to the linear minimization oracle is of order $\mathcal{O}(1/\epsilon^{5.5})$. We also empirically demonstrate the performance of our algorithm on the problem of strategic classification with neural networks. Abhishek Roy 0005, Krishnakumar Balasubramanian 0002, Saeed Ghadimi |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2022 | A Projection-free Algorithm for Constrained Stochastic Multi-level Composition OptimizationabstractWe propose a projection-free conditional gradient-type algorithm for smooth stochastic multi-level composition optimization, where the objective function is a nested composition of $T$ functions and the constraint set is a closed convex set. Our algorithm assumes access to noisy evaluations of the functions and their gradients, through a stochastic first-order oracle satisfying certain standard unbiasedness and second-moment assumptions. We show that the number of calls to the stochastic first-order oracle and the linear-minimization oracle required by the proposed algorithm, to obtain an $\epsilon$-stationary solution, are of order $\mathcal{O}_T(\epsilon^{-2})$ and $\mathcal{O}_T(\epsilon^{-3})$ respectively, where $\mathcal{O}_T$ hides constants in $T$. Notably, the dependence of these complexity bounds on $\epsilon$ and $T$ are separate in the sense that changing one does not impact the dependence of the bounds on the other. For the case of $T=1$, we also provide a high-probability convergence result that depends poly-logarithmically on the inverse confidence level. Moreover, our algorithm is parameter-free and does not require any (increasing) order of mini-batches to converge unlike the common practice in the analysis of stochastic conditional gradient-type algorithms. Tesi Xiao, Krishnakumar Balasubramanian 0002, Saeed Ghadimi |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2022 | Stochastic Zeroth-Order Optimization under Nonstationarity and NonconvexityabstractStochastic zeroth-order optimization algorithms have been predominantly analyzed under the assumption that the objective function being optimized is time-invariant. Motivated by dynamic matrix sensing and completion problems, and online reinforcement learning problems, in this work, we propose and analyze stochastic zeroth-order optimization algorithms when the objective being optimized changes with time. Considering general nonconvex functions, we propose nonstationary versions of regret measures based on first-order and second-order optimal solutions, and provide the corresponding regret bounds. For the case of first-order optimal solution based regret measures, we provide regret bounds in both the low- and high-dimensional settings. For the case of second-order optimal solution based regret, we propose zeroth-order versions of the stochastic cubic-regularized Newton's method based on estimating the Hessian matrices in the bandit setting via second-order Gaussian Stein's identity. Our nonstationary regret bounds in terms of second-order optimal solutions have interesting consequences for avoiding saddle points in the nonstationary setting. Abhishek Roy 0005, Krishnakumar Balasubramanian 0002, Saeed Ghadimi, Prasant Mohapatra |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 3 |
| 2020 | Escaping Saddle-Point Faster under Interpolation-like ConditionsabstractIn this paper, we show that under over-parametrization several standard stochastic optimization algorithms escape saddle-points and converge to local-minimizers much faster. One of the fundamental aspects of over-parametrized models is that they are capable of interpolating the training data. We show that, under interpolation-like assumptions satisfied by the stochastic gradients in an over-parametrization setting, the first-order oracle complexity of Perturbed Stochastic Gradient Descent (PSGD) algorithm to reach an $\epsilon$-local-minimizer, matches the corresponding deterministic rate of $O(1/\epsilon^{2})$. We next analyze Stochastic Cubic-Regularized Newton (SCRN) algorithm under interpolation-like conditions, and show that the oracle complexity to reach an $\epsilon$-local-minimizer under interpolation-like conditions, is $O(1/\epsilon^{2.5})$. While this obtained complexity is better than the corresponding complexity of either PSGD, or SCRN without interpolation-like assumptions, it does not match the rate of $O(1/\epsilon^{1.5})$ corresponding to deterministic Cubic-Regularized Newton method. It seems further Hessian-based interpolation-like assumptions are necessary to bridge this gap. We also discuss the corresponding improved complexities in the zeroth-order settings. Abhishek Roy 0005, Krishnakumar Balasubramanian 0002, Saeed Ghadimi, Prasant Mohapatra |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2018 | Zeroth-order (Non)-Convex Stochastic Optimization via Conditional Gradient and Gradient UpdatesabstractIn this paper, we propose and analyze zeroth-order stochastic approximation algorithms for nonconvex and convex optimization. Specifically, we propose generalizations of the conditional gradient algorithm achieving rates similar to the standard stochastic gradient algorithm using only zeroth-order information. Furthermore, under a structural sparsity assumption, we first illustrate an implicit regularization phenomenon where the standard stochastic gradient algorithm with zeroth-order information adapts to the sparsity of the problem at hand by just varying the step-size. Next, we propose a truncated stochastic gradient algorithm with zeroth-order information, whose rate of convergence depends only poly-logarithmically on the dimensionality. Krishnakumar Balasubramanian 0002, Saeed Ghadimi |
NeurIPS | 2 |