EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Atsushi Shibagaki
dblp:178/3234
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none
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
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 |
Learning theory · 38% Optimization for machine learning · 29% Learning paradigms · 19% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
incremental learning |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Efficiently Monitoring Small Data Modification Effect for Large-Scale Learning in Changing Environment · AAAI 2018 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
safe screening |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Simultaneous Safe Screening of Features and Samples in Doubly Sparse Modeling · ICML 2016 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
sparse model |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Simultaneous Safe Screening of Features and Samples in Doubly Sparse Modeling · ICML 2016 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › model selection
cross-validation |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Regularization Path of Cross-Validation Error Lower Bounds · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
model selection |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Regularization Path of Cross-Validation Error Lower Bounds · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
regularization |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Regularization Path of Cross-Validation Error Lower Bounds · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical learning theory › regularization theory
regularization path |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Regularization Path of Cross-Validation Error Lower Bounds · NIPS 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
large-scale learning · 0.3safe screening · 0.2alternating optimization · 0.2lower bound analysis · 0.2cross-validation · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Efficiently Monitoring Small Data Modification Effect for Large-Scale Learning in Changing Environment
Hiroyuki Hanada, Atsushi Shibagaki, Jun Sakuma, Ichiro Takeuchi |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2016 | Simultaneous Safe Screening of Features and Samples in Doubly Sparse ModelingabstractThe problem of learning a sparse model is conceptually interpreted as the process of identifying active features/samples and then optimizing the model over them. Recently introduced safe screening allows us to identify a part of non-active features/samples. So far, safe screening has been individually studied either for feature screening or for sample screening. In this paper, we introduce a new approach for safely screening features and samples simultaneously by alternatively iterating feature and sample screening steps. A significant advantage of considering them simultaneously rather than individually is that they have a synergy effect in the sense that the results of the previous safe feature screening can be exploited for improving the next safe sample screening performances, and vice-versa. We first theoretically investigate the synergy effect, and then illustrate the practical advantage through intensive numerical experiments for problems with large numbers of features and samples. Atsushi Shibagaki, Masayuki Karasuyama, Kohei Hatano, Ichiro Takeuchi |
ICML | 1 |
| 2015 | Regularization Path of Cross-Validation Error Lower BoundsabstractCareful tuning of a regularization parameter is indispensable in many machine learning tasks because it has a significant impact on generalization performances.Nevertheless, current practice of regularization parameter tuning is more of an art than a science, e.g., it is hard to tell how many grid-points would be needed in cross-validation (CV) for obtaining a solution with sufficiently small CV error.In this paper we propose a novel framework for computing a lower bound of the CV errors as a function of the regularization parameter, which we call regularization path of CV error lower bounds.The proposed framework can be used for providing a theoretical approximation guarantee on a set of solutions in the sense that how far the CV error of the current best solution could be away from best possible CV error in the entire range of the regularization parameters.We demonstrate through numerical experiments that a theoretically guaranteed a choice of regularization parameter in the above sense is possible with reasonable computational costs. Atsushi Shibagaki, Yoshiki Suzuki, Masayuki Karasuyama, Ichiro Takeuchi |
NIPS | 1 |