EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mainak Jas
dblp:135/0972
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
0000-0002-3199-9027ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-authorGraphics, 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
3 papers |
Representation and self-supervised learning · 64% Learning theory · 20% Vision and language · 15% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Multimedia analysis and retrieval · 100% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Usability and user experience research · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning
sparse coding |
0.6 | 2 | 2018 | Multivariate Convolutional Sparse Coding for Electromagnetic Brain Signals · NeurIPS 2018 Learning the Morphology of Brain Signals Using Alpha-Stable Convolutional Sparse Coding · NIPS 2017 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › neuroscience
neuroinformatics |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Multivariate Convolutional Sparse Coding for Electromagnetic Brain Signals · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning › sparse coding
convolutional sparse coding |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Learning the Morphology of Brain Signals Using Alpha-Stable Convolutional Sparse Coding · NIPS 2017 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › high-dimensional statistics
heavy-tailed distribution |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Learning the Morphology of Brain Signals Using Alpha-Stable Convolutional Sparse Coding · NIPS 2017 |
Computer vision › Vision and language
image captioning |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Image specificity · CVPR 2015 |
Multimedia analysis and retrieval › cross-modal retrieval
image-text retrieval |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Image specificity · CVPR 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
greedy coordinate descent · 0.7convolutional sparse coding · 0.7alternating minimization · 0.7human annotation · 0.7feature-based prediction · 0.7probabilistic model · 0.3monte carlo expectation-maximization · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Multivariate Convolutional Sparse Coding for Electromagnetic Brain SignalsabstractFrequency-specific patterns of neural activity are traditionally interpreted as sustained rhythmic oscillations, and related to cognitive mechanisms such as attention, high level visual processing or motor control. While alpha waves (8--12\,Hz) are known to closely resemble short sinusoids, and thus are revealed by Fourier analysis or wavelet transforms, there is an evolving debate that electromagnetic neural signals are composed of more complex waveforms that cannot be analyzed by linear filters and traditional signal representations. In this paper, we propose to learn dedicated representations of such recordings using a multivariate convolutional sparse coding (CSC) algorithm. Applied to electroencephalography (EEG) or magnetoencephalography (MEG) data, this method is able to learn not only prototypical temporal waveforms, but also associated spatial patterns so their origin can be localized in the brain. Our algorithm is based on alternated minimization and a greedy coordinate descent solver that leads to state-of-the-art running time on long time series. To demonstrate the implications of this method, we apply it to MEG data and show that it is able to recover biological artifacts. More remarkably, our approach also reveals the presence of non-sinusoidal mu-shaped patterns, along with their topographic maps related to the somatosensory cortex. Tom Dupré la Tour, Thomas Moreau 0001, Mainak Jas, Alexandre Gramfort |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2017 | Learning the Morphology of Brain Signals Using Alpha-Stable Convolutional Sparse CodingabstractNeural time-series data contain a wide variety of prototypical signal waveforms (atoms) that are of significant importance in clinical and cognitive research. One of the goals for analyzing such data is hence to extract such `shift-invariant' atoms. Even though some success has been reported with existing algorithms, they are limited in applicability due to their heuristic nature. Moreover, they are often vulnerable to artifacts and impulsive noise, which are typically present in raw neural recordings. In this study, we address these issues and propose a novel probabilistic convolutional sparse coding (CSC) model for learning shift-invariant atoms from raw neural signals containing potentially severe artifacts. In the core of our model, which we call $\alpha$CSC, lies a family of heavy-tailed distributions called $\alpha$-stable distributions. We develop a novel, computationally efficient Monte Carlo expectation-maximization algorithm for inference. The maximization step boils down to a weighted CSC problem, for which we develop a computationally efficient optimization algorithm. Our results show that the proposed algorithm achieves state-of-the-art convergence speeds. Besides, $\alpha$CSC is significantly more robust to artifacts when compared to three competing algorithms: it can extract spike bursts, oscillations, and even reveal more subtle phenomena such as cross-frequency coupling when applied to noisy neural time series. Mainak Jas, Tom Dupré la Tour, Umut Simsekli, Alexandre Gramfort |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2015 | Image specificityabstractFor some images, descriptions written by multiple people are consistent with each other. But for other images, descriptions across people vary considerably. In other words, some images are specific - they elicit consistent descriptions from different people - while other images are ambiguous. Applications involving images and text can benefit from an understanding of which images are specific and which ones are ambiguous. For instance, consider text-based image retrieval. If a query description is moderately similar to the caption (or reference description) of an ambiguous image, that query may be considered a decent match to the image. But if the image is very specific, a moderate similarity between the query and the reference description may not be sufficient to retrieve the image. In this paper, we introduce the notion of image specificity. We present two mechanisms to measure specificity given multiple descriptions of an image: an automated measure and a measure that relies on human judgement. We analyze image specificity with respect to image content and properties to better understand what makes an image specific. We then train models to automatically predict the specificity of an image from image features alone without requiring textual descriptions of the image. Finally, we show that modeling image specificity leads to improvements in a text-based image retrieval application. Mainak Jas, Devi Parikh |
CVPR | 1 |