Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Nathaniel Kell
dblp:154/6820
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
2as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 4 · 1 first-authorArtificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 first-author · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 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.
| Theoretical computer science
5 papers |
Approximation and online algorithms · 48% Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 30% Mathematical optimization · 17% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers |
Cloud and datacenter computing · 46% Electronic design automation · 27% Parallel and multicore computing · 27% |
Topics — the 19 heaviest of 19, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Approximation and online algorithms › online algorithms › online scheduling
online load balancing |
0.7 | 2 | 2019 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · SIAM J. Comput. 2019 Online load balancing on related machines · STOC 2018 |
Approximation and online algorithms
approximation algorithms |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Approximations for Indivisible Concave Allocations with Applications to Nash Welfare Maximization · AAAI 2023 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
fair division |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Approximations for Indivisible Concave Allocations with Applications to Nash Welfare Maximization · AAAI 2023 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › fair division
indivisible goods allocation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Approximations for Indivisible Concave Allocations with Applications to Nash Welfare Maximization · AAAI 2023 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › welfare maximization
nash social welfare |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Approximations for Indivisible Concave Allocations with Applications to Nash Welfare Maximization · AAAI 2023 |
Approximation and online algorithms › online algorithms
online scheduling |
0.6 | 2 | 2019 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · SIAM J. Comput. 2019 Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · FOCS 2015 |
Mathematical optimization › scheduling › parallel machine scheduling
vector scheduling |
0.6 | 2 | 2019 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · SIAM J. Comput. 2019 Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · FOCS 2015 |
Approximation and online algorithms › online algorithms
competitive analysis |
0.5 | 2 | 2018 | Online load balancing on related machines · STOC 2018 Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · FOCS 2015 |
Algorithms and data structures
load balancing |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · SIAM J. Comput. 2019 |
Mathematical optimization
scheduling |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · SIAM J. Comput. 2019 |
Approximation and online algorithms › approximation algorithms
l_p norm objective |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Online load balancing on related machines · STOC 2018 |
Mathematical optimization › scheduling › parallel machine scheduling
related machines |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Online load balancing on related machines · STOC 2018 |
Approximation and online algorithms › online allocation
adwords problem |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Online Budgeted Allocation with General Budgets · EC 2016 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › resource allocation
budget allocation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Online Budgeted Allocation with General Budgets · EC 2016 |
Approximation and online algorithms
online allocation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Online Budgeted Allocation with General Budgets · EC 2016 |
Approximation and online algorithms › online algorithms
online matching |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Online Budgeted Allocation with General Budgets · EC 2016 |
Cloud and datacenter computing
cluster resource management and scheduling |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · SIAM J. Comput. 2019 |
Parallel and multicore computing
load balancing |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · FOCS 2015 |
Electronic design automation › high-level synthesis
scheduling |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector Scheduling · FOCS 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
competitive analysis · 1.3randomized coding · 1.2potential function · 1.2tatonnement · 0.7convex programming · 0.7online algorithms · 0.6online coloring game · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Approximations for Indivisible Concave Allocations with Applications to Nash Welfare MaximizationabstractWe study a general allocation setting where agent valuations are concave additive. In this model, a collection of items must be uniquely distributed among a set of agents, where each agent-item pair has a specified utility. The objective is to maximize the sum of agent valuations, each of which is an arbitrary non-decreasing concave function of the agent's total additive utility. This setting was studied by Devanur and Jain (STOC 2012) in the online setting for divisible items. In this paper, we obtain both multiplicative and additive approximations in the offline setting for indivisible items. Our approximations depend on novel parameters that measure the local multiplicative/additive curvatures of each agent valuation, which we show correspond directly to the integrality gap of the natural assignment convex program of the problem. Furthermore, we extend our additive guarantees to obtain constant multiplicative approximations for Asymmetric Nash Welfare Maximization when agents have smooth valuations. This algorithm also yields an interesting tatonnement-style interpretation, where agents adjust uniform prices and items are assigned according to maximum weighted bang-per-buck ratios. Nathaniel Kell, Kevin Sun 0001 |
AAAI | 1 |
| 2019 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector SchedulingabstractModern data centers face a key challenge of effectively serving user requests that arrive online. Such requests are inherently multidimensional and characterized by demand vectors over multiple resources such as processor cycles, storage space, and network bandwidth. Typically, different resources require different objectives to be optimized, and $L_r$ norms of loads are among the most popular objectives considered. Furthermore, the server clusters are also often heterogeneous making the scheduling problem more challenging. To address these problems, we consider the online vector scheduling problem in this paper. Introduced by Chekuri and Khanna in 2006, vector scheduling is a generalization of classical load balancing, where every job has a vector load instead of a scalar load. The scalar problem, introduced by Graham in 1966, and its many variants (identical and unrelated machines, makespan and $L_r$ norm optimization, offline and online jobs, etc.) have been extensively studied over the last 50 years. In this paper, we resolve the online complexity of the vector scheduling problem and its important generalizations---for all $L_r$ norms and in both the identical and unrelated machines settings. For an instance with $m$ machines and $d$ dimensions, our main results are: For identical machines, we show that the optimal competitive ratio is $\Theta(\log d / \log \log d)$ by giving an online lower bound and an algorithm with an asymptotically matching competitive ratio. The lower bound is technically challenging, and is obtained via an online lower bound for the minimum monochromatic clique problem using a novel online coloring game and randomized coding scheme. Our techniques also extend to asymptotically tight upper and lower bounds for general $L_r$ norms. For unrelated machines, we show that the optimal competitive ratio is $\Theta(\log m + \log d)$ by giving an online lower bound that matches a previously known upper bound. Unlike identical machines, however, extending these results, particularly the upper bound, to general $L_r$ norms requires new ideas. In particular, we use a carefully constructed potential function that balances the individual $L_r$ objectives with the overall (convexified) min-max objective to guide the online algorithm and track the changes in potential to bound the competitive ratio. Sungjin Im, Nathaniel Kell, Janardhan Kulkarni, Debmalya Panigrahi |
SIAM J. Comput. | 2 |
| 2018 | Online load balancing on related machinesabstractIn this paper, we consider the problem of assigning jobs online to machines with non-uniform speeds (also called related machines) so to optimize a given norm of the machine loads. A long line of work, starting with the seminal work of Graham in the 1960s, has led to tight competitive ratios for all ℓq norms for two scenarios: the special case of identical machines (uniform machine speeds) and the more general setting of unrelated machines (jobs have arbitrary processing times on machines). For non-uniform machine speeds, however, the only known result was a constant competitive competitive ratio for the makespan (ℓ∞) norm, via the so-called slowest-fit algorithm (Aspnes, Azar, Fiat, Plotkin, and Waarts, JACM ’97). Our first result in this paper is to obtain the first constant-competitive algorithm for scheduling on related machines for any arbitrary ℓq norm. Sungjin Im, Nathaniel Kell, Debmalya Panigrahi, Maryam Shadloo |
STOC | 2 |
| 2016 | Online Budgeted Allocation with General BudgetsabstractWe study the online budgeted allocation (also called Adwords) problem, where a set of impressions arriving online are allocated to a set of budget-constrained advertisers to maximize revenue. Motivated by connections to Internet advertising, several variants of this problem have been studied since the seminal work of Mehta, Saberi, Vazirani, and Vazirani (FOCS 2005). However, this entire body of work focuses on a single budget for every advertising campaign, whereas in order to fully represent the actual agenda of an advertiser, an advertising budget should be expressible over multiple tiers of user-attribute granularity. A simple example is an advertising campaign that is constrained by an overall budget but is also accompanied by a set of sub-budgets for each target demographic. In such a contract scheme, an advertiser can specify their true user-targeting goals, allowing the publisher to fulfill them through relevant allocations. Nathaniel Kell, Debmalya Panigrahi |
EC | 1 |
| 2015 | Tight Bounds for Online Vector SchedulingabstractModern data centers face a key challenge of effectively serving user requests that arrive online. Such requests are inherently multi-dimensional and characterized by demand vectors over multiple resources such as processor cycles, storage space, and network bandwidth. Typically, different resources require different objectives to be optimized, and Lrnorms of loads are among the most popular objectives considered. Furthermore, the server clusters are also often heterogeneous making the scheduling problem more challenging. To address these problems, we consider the online vector scheduling problem in this paper. Introduced by Chekuri and Khanna (SIAM J. of Comp. 2006), vector scheduling is a generalization of classical load balancing, where every job has a vector load instead of a scalar load. The scalar problem, introduced by Graham in 1966, and its many variants (identical and unrelated machines, makespan and Lr-norm optimization, offline and online jobs, etc.) have been extensively studied over the last 50 years. In this paper, we resolve the online complexity of the vector scheduling problem and its important generalizations - for all Lrnorms and in both the identical and unrelated machines settings. Our main results are: · For identical machines, we show that the optimal competitive ratio is Θ(log d/ log log d) by giving an online lower bound and an algorithm with an asymptotically matching competitive ratio. The lower bound is technically challenging, and is obtained via an online lower bound for the minimum mono-chromatic clique problem using a novel online coloring game and randomized coding scheme. Our techniques also extend to asymptotically tight upper and lower bounds for general Lrnorms. · For unrelated machines, we show that the optimal competitive ratio is Θ(log m + log d) by giving an online lower bound that matches a previously known upper bound. Unlike identical machines, however, extending these results, particularly the upper bound, to general Lrnorms requires new ideas. In particular, we use a carefully constructed potential function that balances the individual Lrobjectives with the overall (convexified) min-max objective to guide the online algorithm and track the changes in potential to bound the competitive ratio. Sungjin Im, Nathaniel Kell, Janardhan Kulkarni, Debmalya Panigrahi |
FOCS | 2 |