Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kiran Vodrahalli
dblp:188/5863
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
0as first author
4since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 7 · 3 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 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.
| Artificial intelligence
4 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 53% Robot manipulation · 17% Learning theory · 15% | |
| Theoretical computer science
4 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 81% Information theory · 13% Automata and formal languages · 6% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Privacy and data protection · 100% |
Topics — the 17 heaviest of 18, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › regret minimization
no-regret learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Online Learning with Bounded Recall · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
online learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Online Learning with Bounded Recall · ICML 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
repeated games |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Online Learning with Bounded Recall · ICML 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
equilibrium computation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Is Learning in Games Good for the Learners? · NeurIPS 2023 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
learning in games |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Is Learning in Games Good for the Learners? · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
hierarchical reinforcement learning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Logical Options Framework · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › hierarchical reinforcement learning
option discovery |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Logical Options Framework · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy composition |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Logical Options Framework · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
imitation learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Deep Bayesian Nonparametric Learning of Rules and Plans from Demonstrations with a Learned Automaton Prior · AAAI 2020 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation
learning from demonstration |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Deep Bayesian Nonparametric Learning of Rules and Plans from Demonstrations with a Learned Automaton Prior · AAAI 2020 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation
mobile manipulation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Deep Bayesian Nonparametric Learning of Rules and Plans from Demonstrations with a Learned Automaton Prior · AAAI 2020 |
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Privacy accounting and quality control in the sage differentially private ML platform · SOSP 2019 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy
privacy accounting |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Privacy accounting and quality control in the sage differentially private ML platform · SOSP 2019 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
text embedding |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | A Compressed Sensing View of Unsupervised Text Embeddings, Bag-of-n-Grams, and LSTMs · ICLR (Poster) 2018 |
Information theory › signal processing
compressed sensing |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | A Compressed Sensing View of Unsupervised Text Embeddings, Bag-of-n-Grams, and LSTMs · ICLR (Poster) 2018 |
Automata and formal languages
finite automata |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | The Logical Options Framework · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning and data management › machine learning systems
machine learning platform |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Privacy accounting and quality control in the sage differentially private ML platform · SOSP 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
hedge · 1.5bounded-recall algorithms · 1.5planning · 1.4hierarchical reinforcement learning · 1.0automaton representation · 1.0differential privacy · 0.8block composition · 0.8no-regret algorithms · 0.7mean-based algorithms · 0.7compressed sensing · 0.7bag-of-n-grams · 0.7hierarchical model · 0.4deep bayesian nonparametric model · 0.4automaton · 0.4LSTM · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Online Learning with Bounded RecallabstractWe study the problem of full-information online learning in the “bounded recall” setting popular in the study of repeated games. An online learning algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ is $M$-bounded-recall if its output at time $t$ can be written as a function of the $M$ previous rewards (and not e.g. any other internal state of $\mathcal{A}$). We first demonstrate that a natural approach to constructing bounded-recall algorithms from mean-based no-regret learning algorithms (e.g., running Hedge over the last $M$ rounds) fails, and that any such algorithm incurs constant regret per round. We then construct a stationary bounded-recall algorithm that achieves a per-round regret of $\Theta(1/\sqrt{M})$, which we complement with a tight lower bound. Finally, we show that unlike the perfect recall setting, any low regret bound bounded-recall algorithm must be aware of the ordering of the past $M$ losses – any bounded-recall algorithm which plays a symmetric function of the past $M$ losses must incur constant regret per round. Jon Schneider, Kiran Vodrahalli |
ICML | 2 |
| 2023 | Is Learning in Games Good for the Learners?abstractWe consider a number of questions related to tradeoffs between reward and regret in repeated gameplay between two agents. To facilitate this, we introduce a notion of generalized equilibrium which allows for asymmetric regret constraints, and yields polytopes of feasible values for each agent and pair of regret constraints, where we show that any such equilibrium is reachable by a pair of algorithms which maintain their regret guarantees against arbitrary opponents. As a central example, we highlight the case one agent is no-swap and the other's regret is unconstrained. We show that this captures an extension of Stackelberg equilibria with a matching optimal value, and that there exists a wide class of games where a player can significantly increase their utility by deviating from a no-swap-regret algorithm against a no-swap learner (in fact, almost any game without pure Nash equilibria is of this form). Additionally, we make use of generalized equilibria to consider tradeoffs in terms of the opponent's algorithm choice. We give a tight characterization for the maximal reward obtainable against some no-regret learner, yet we also show a class of games in which this is bounded away from the value obtainable against the class of common "mean-based" no-regret algorithms. Finally, we consider the question of learning reward-optimal strategies via repeated play with a no-regret agent when the game is initially unknown. Again we show tradeoffs depending on the opponent's learning algorithm: the Stackelberg strategy is learnable in exponential time with any no-regret agent (and in polynomial time with any no-adaptive-regret agent) for any game where it is learnable via queries, and there are games where it is learnable in polynomial time against any no-swap-regret agent but requires exponential time against a mean-based no-regret agent. Jon Schneider, Kiran Vodrahalli |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2021 | The Logical Options FrameworkabstractLearning composable policies for environments with complex rules and tasks is a challenging problem. We introduce a hierarchical reinforcement learning framework called the Logical Options Framework (LOF) that learns policies that are satisfying, optimal, and composable. LOF efficiently learns policies that satisfy tasks by representing the task as an automaton and integrating it into learning and planning. We provide and prove conditions under which LOF will learn satisfying, optimal policies. And lastly, we show how LOF’s learned policies can be composed to satisfy unseen tasks with only 10-50 retraining steps on our benchmarks. We evaluate LOF on four tasks in discrete and continuous domains, including a 3D pick-and-place environment. Brandon Araki, Xiao Li 0025, Kiran Vodrahalli, Jonathan A. DeCastro, Micah J. Fry, Daniela Rus |
ICML | 3 |
| 2021 | The Platform Design Problem
Christos H. Papadimitriou, Kiran Vodrahalli, Mihalis Yannakakis |
WINE | 2 |
| 2020 | Deep Bayesian Nonparametric Learning of Rules and Plans from Demonstrations with a Learned Automaton PriorabstractWe introduce a method to learn imitative policies from expert demonstrations that are interpretable and manipulable. We achieve interpretability by modeling the interactions between high-level actions as an automaton with connections to formal logic. We achieve manipulability by integrating this automaton into planning, so that changes to the automaton have predictable effects on the learned behavior. These qualities allow a human user to first understand what the model has learned, and then either correct the learned behavior or zero-shot generalize to new, similar tasks. We build upon previous work by no longer requiring additional supervised information which is hard to collect in practice. We achieve this by using a deep Bayesian nonparametric hierarchical model. We test our model on several domains and also show results for a real-world implementation on a mobile robotic arm platform. Brandon Araki, Kiran Vodrahalli, Thomas Leech, Cristian Ioan Vasile, Mark Donahue, Daniela Rus |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2019 | Attribute-efficient learning of monomials over highly-correlated variablesabstractWe study the problem of learning a real-valued function of correlated variables. Solving this problem is of interest since many classical learning results apply only in the case of learning functions of random variables that are independent. We show how to recover a high-dimensional, sparse monomial model from Gaussian examples with sample complexity that is poly-logarithmic in the total number of variables and polynomial in the number of relevant variables. Our algorithm is based on a transformation of the variables—taking their logarithm—followed by a sparse linear regression procedure, which is statistically and computationally efficient. While this transformation is commonly used in applied non-linear regression, its statistical guarantees have never been rigorously analyzed. We prove that the sparse regression procedure succeeds even in cases where the original features are highly correlated and fail to satisfy the standard assumptions required for sparse linear regression. Alexandr Andoni, Rishabh Dudeja, Daniel Hsu 0001, Kiran Vodrahalli |
ALT | 4 |
| 2019 | Privacy accounting and quality control in the sage differentially private ML platformabstractCompanies increasingly expose machine learning (ML) models trained over sensitive user data to untrusted domains, such as end-user devices and wide-access model stores. This creates a need to control the data's leakage through these models. We present Sage, a differentially private (DP) ML platform that bounds the cumulative leakage of training data through models. Sage builds upon the rich literature on DP ML algorithms and contributes pragmatic solutions to two of the most pressing systems challenges of global DP: running out of privacy budget and the privacy-utility tradeoff. To address the former, we develop block composition, a new privacy loss accounting method that leverages the growing database regime of ML workloads to keep training models endlessly on a sensitive data stream while enforcing a global DP guarantee for the stream. To address the latter, we develop privacy-adaptive training, a process that trains a model on growing amounts of data and/or with increasing privacy parameters until, with high probability, the model meets developer-configured quality criteria. Sage's methods are designed to integrate with TensorFlow-Extended, Google's open-source ML platform. They illustrate how a systems focus on characteristics of ML workloads enables pragmatic solutions that are not apparent when one focuses on individual algorithms, as most DP ML literature does. Mathias Lécuyer, Riley Spahn, Kiran Vodrahalli, Roxana Geambasu, Daniel Hsu 0001 |
SOSP | 3 |
| 2018 | A Compressed Sensing View of Unsupervised Text Embeddings, Bag-of-n-Grams, and LSTMs
Sanjeev Arora, Mikhail Khodak, Nikunj Saunshi, Kiran Vodrahalli |
ICLR (Poster) | 4 |
| 2018 | A Large Self-Annotated Corpus for Sarcasm
Mikhail Khodak, Nikunj Saunshi, Kiran Vodrahalli |
LREC | 3 |