Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Suhas Vijaykumar

dblp:183/8660 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
—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.

Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Learning theory · 60% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 40%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
causal inference
0.712023
Synthetic Combinations: A Causal Inference Framework for Combinatorial Interventions · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › causal inference
potential outcomes
0.712023
Synthetic Combinations: A Causal Inference Framework for Combinatorial Interventions · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory
empirical risk minimization
0.512021
Localization, Convexity, and Star Aggregation · NeurIPS 2021
Machine learning › Learning theory › PAC learning
improper learning
0.512021
Localization, Convexity, and Star Aggregation · NeurIPS 2021
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization bounds › rademacher complexity
offset rademacher complexity
0.512021
Localization, Convexity, and Star Aggregation · NeurIPS 2021
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization bounds
rademacher complexity
0.512021
Localization, Convexity, and Star Aggregation · NeurIPS 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

matrix factorization · 0.7low-rank estimation · 0.7fourier analysis · 0.7self-concordance · 0.5convex empirical risk minimization · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Synthetic Combinations: A Causal Inference Framework for Combinatorial Interventions
abstract
We consider a setting where there are $N$ heterogeneous units and $p$ interventions. Our goal is to learn unit-specific potential outcomes for any combination of these $p$ interventions, i.e., $N \times 2^p$ causal parameters. Choosing a combination of interventions is a problem that naturally arises in a variety of applications such as factorial design experiments and recommendation engines (e.g., showing a set of movies that maximizes engagement for a given user). Running $N \times 2^p$ experiments to estimate the various parameters is likely expensive and/or infeasible as $N$ and $p$ grow. Further, with observational data there is likely confounding, i.e., whether or not a unit is seen under a combination is correlated with its potential outcome under that combination. We study this problem under a novel model that imposes latent structure across both units and combinations of interventions. Specifically, we assume latent similarity in potential outcomes across units (i.e., the matrix of potential outcomes is approximately rank $r$) and regularity in how combinations of interventions interact (i.e., the coefficients in the Fourier expansion of the potential outcomes is approximately $s$ sparse). We establish identification for all $N \times 2^p$ parameters despite unobserved confounding. We propose an estimation procedure, Synthetic Combinations, and establish finite-sample consistency under precise conditions on the observation pattern. We show that Synthetic Combinations is able to consistently estimate unit-specific potential outcomes given a total of $\text{poly}(r) \times \left( N + s^2p\right)$ observations. In comparison, previous methods that do not exploit structure across both units and combinations have poorer sample complexity scaling as $\min(N \times s^2p, \ \ r \times (N + 2^p))$.
Abhineet Agarwal, Anish Agarwal, Suhas Vijaykumar
NeurIPS3
2021 Localization, Convexity, and Star Aggregation
abstract
Offset Rademacher complexities have been shown to provide tight upper bounds for the square loss in a broad class of problems including improper statistical learning and online learning. We show that the offset complexity can be generalized to any loss that satisfies a certain general convexity condition. Further, we show that this condition is closely related to both exponential concavity and self-concordance, unifying apparently disparate results. By a novel geometric argument, many of our bounds translate to improper learning in a non-convex class with Audibert's star algorithm. Thus, the offset complexity provides a versatile analytic tool that covers both convex empirical risk minimization and improper learning under entropy conditions. Applying the method, we recover the optimal rates for proper and improper learning with the $p$-loss for $1 < p < \infty$, and show that improper variants of empirical risk minimization can attain fast rates for logistic regression and other generalized linear models.
Suhas Vijaykumar
NeurIPS1