Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Mikhail Mironov
dblp:166/7683
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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
2 papers |
Algorithms and data structures · 46% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 40% Computational complexity · 14% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Graph learning · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph generation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Challenges of Generating Structurally Diverse Graphs · NeurIPS 2024 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory
graph generation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Challenges of Generating Structurally Diverse Graphs · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
random graph model · 1.5local graph optimization · 1.5genetic algorithm · 1.5axiomatic analysis · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Measuring Diversity: Axioms and ChallengesabstractThis paper addresses the problem of quantifying diversity for a set of objects. First, we conduct a systematic review of existing diversity measures and explore their undesirable behavior in certain cases. Based on this review, we formulate three desirable properties (axioms) of a reliable diversity measure: monotonicity, uniqueness, and continuity. We show that none of the existing measures has all three properties and thus these measures are not suitable for quantifying diversity. Then, we construct two examples of measures that have all the desirable properties, thus proving that the list of axioms is not self-contradictory. Unfortunately, the constructed examples are too computationally expensive (NP-hard) for practical use. Thus, we pose an open problem of constructing a diversity measure that has all the listed properties and can be computed in practice or proving that all such measures are NP-hard to compute. Mikhail Mironov, Liudmila Ostroumova |
ICML | 1 |
| 2024 | Challenges of Generating Structurally Diverse GraphsabstractFor many graph-related problems, it can be essential to have a set of structurally diverse graphs. For instance, such graphs can be used for testing graph algorithms or their neural approximations. However, to the best of our knowledge, the problem of generating structurally diverse graphs has not been explored in the literature. In this paper, we fill this gap. First, we discuss how to define diversity for a set of graphs, why this task is non-trivial, and how one can choose a proper diversity measure. Then, for a given diversity measure, we propose and compare several algorithms optimizing it: we consider approaches based on standard random graph models, local graph optimization, genetic algorithms, and neural generative models. We show that it is possible to significantly improve diversity over basic random graph generators. Additionally, our analysis of generated graphs allows us to better understand the properties of graph distances: depending on which diversity measure is used for optimization, the obtained graphs may possess very different structural properties which gives a better understanding of the graph distance underlying the diversity measure. Fedor Velikonivtsev, Mikhail Mironov, Liudmila Ostroumova |
NeurIPS | 2 |