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

Martin Ritzert

dblp:194/2447 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
9ranked-venue papers
0as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-5322-3684ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 4 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Theory of computation · 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
5 papers
Graph learning · 56% Learning theory · 28% Kernel, tree and ensemble methods · 16%
Theoretical computer science
4 papers
Computational complexity · 62% Logic in computer science · 27% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 11%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Data models and query languages · 100%

Topics — the 17 heaviest of 17, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods › ensemble learning
boosting
1.222023
AdaBoost is not an Optimal Weak to Strong Learner · ICML 2023
Optimal Weak to Strong Learning · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory
weak-to-strong learning
1.222023
AdaBoost is not an Optimal Weak to Strong Learner · ICML 2023
Optimal Weak to Strong Learning · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
expressive power
1.122024
Distinguished In Uniform: Self-Attention Vs. Virtual Nodes · ICLR 2024
Weisfeiler and Leman Go Neural: Higher-Order Graph Neural Networks · AAAI 2019
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph neural network
1.122024
Distinguished In Uniform: Self-Attention Vs. Virtual Nodes · ICLR 2024
Weisfeiler and Leman Go Neural: Higher-Order Graph Neural Networks · AAAI 2019
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
graph transformer
0.812024
Distinguished In Uniform: Self-Attention Vs. Virtual Nodes · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
message passing
0.812024
Distinguished In Uniform: Self-Attention Vs. Virtual Nodes · ICLR 2024
Computational complexity › learning theory
expressive power of neural networks
0.812024
Distinguished In Uniform: Self-Attention Vs. Virtual Nodes · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory
sample complexity
0.612022
Optimal Weak to Strong Learning · NeurIPS 2022
Computational complexity
parameterized complexity
0.612022
On the Parameterized Complexity of Learning First-Order Logic · PODS 2022
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network › graph neural network architecture
higher-order graph neural network
0.412019
Weisfeiler and Leman Go Neural: Higher-Order Graph Neural Networks · AAAI 2019
Machine learning › Learning theory
PAC learning
0.312017
Learning first-order definable concepts over structures of small degree · LICS 2017
Logic in computer science
finite model theory
0.312017
Learning first-order definable concepts over structures of small degree · LICS 2017
Logic in computer science › model theory
first-order definability
0.312017
Learning first-order definable concepts over structures of small degree · LICS 2017
Data models and query languages › query language
first-order queries
0.212022
On the Parameterized Complexity of Learning First-Order Logic · PODS 2022
Data models and query languages
query language
0.212022
On the Parameterized Complexity of Learning First-Order Logic · PODS 2022
Graph algorithms and graph theory
graph isomorphism
0.112019
Weisfeiler and Leman Go Neural: Higher-Order Graph Neural Networks · AAAI 2019
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph isomorphism
weisfeiler-leman algorithm
0.112019
Weisfeiler and Leman Go Neural: Higher-Order Graph Neural Networks · AAAI 2019

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

weisfeiler-leman heuristic · 0.8k-dimensional GNN · 0.8sample complexity analysis · 0.7probably approximately correct learning · 0.6generalization bounds · 0.6first-order logic · 0.6adaboost · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Boosting, Voting Classifiers and Randomized Sample Compression Schemes
abstract
In Boosting, we aim to leverage multiple weak learners to produce a strong learner. At the center of this paradigm lies the concept of building the strong learner as a voting classifier, which outputs a weighted majority vote of the weak learners. While many successful Boosting algorithms, such as the iconic AdaBoost, produce voting classifiers, their theoretical performance has long remained sub-optimal: The best known bounds on the number of training examples necessary for a voting classifier to obtain a given accuracy has so far always contained at least two logarithmic factors above what is known to be achievable by general weak-to-strong learners. In this work, we break this barrier by proposing a randomized Boosting algorithm that outputs voting classifiers whose generalization error contains a single logarithmic dependency on the sample size. We obtain this result by building a general framework that extends sample compression methods to support randomized learning algorithms based on sub-sampling.
Arthur da Cunha 0001, Kasper Green Larsen, Martin Ritzert
ALT3
2024 Distinguished In Uniform: Self-Attention Vs. Virtual Nodes
abstract
Graph Transformers (GTs) such as SAN and GPS are graph processing models that combine Message-Passing GNNs (MPGNNs) with global Self-Attention. They were shown to be universal function approximators, with two reservations: 1. The initial node features must be augmented with certain positional encodings. 2. The approximation is non-uniform: Graphs of different sizes may require a different approximating network. We first clarify that this form of universality is not unique to GTs: Using the same positional encodings, also pure MPGNNs and even 2-layer MLPs are non-uniform universal approximators. We then consider uniform expressivity: The target function is to be approximated by a single network for graphs of all sizes. There, we compare GTs to the more efficient MPGNN + Virtual Node architecture. The essential difference between the two model definitions is in their global computation method: Self-Attention Vs Virtual Node. We prove that none of the models is a uniform-universal approximator, before proving our main result: Neither model’s uniform expressivity subsumes the other’s. We demonstrate the theory with experiments on synthetic data. We further augment our study with real-world datasets, observing mixed results which indicate no clear ranking in practice as well.
Eran Rosenbluth, Jan Tönshoff, Martin Ritzert, Berke Kisin, Martin Grohe
ICLR3
2023 AdaBoost is not an Optimal Weak to Strong Learner
abstract
AdaBoost is a classic boosting algorithm for combining multiple inaccurate classifiers produced by a weak learner, to produce a strong learner with arbitrarily high accuracy when given enough training data. Determining the optimal number of samples necessary to obtain a given accuracy of the strong learner, is a basic learning theoretic question. Larsen and Ritzert (NeurIPS’22) recently presented the first provably optimal weak-to-strong learner. However, their algorithm is somewhat complicated and it remains an intriguing question whether the prototypical boosting algorithm AdaBoost also makes optimal use of training samples. In this work, we answer this question in the negative. Concretely, we show that the sample complexity of AdaBoost, and other classic variations thereof, are sub-optimal by at least one logarithmic factor in the desired accuracy of the strong learner.
Mikael Høgsgaard, Kasper Green Larsen, Martin Ritzert
ICML3
2022 Optimal Weak to Strong Learning
abstract
The classic algorithm AdaBoost allows to convert a weak learner, that is an algorithm that produces a hypothesis which is slightly better than chance, into a strong learner, achieving arbitrarily high accuracy when given enough training data. We present a new algorithm that constructs a strong learner from a weak learner, but uses less training data than AdaBoost and all other weak to strong learners to achieve the same generalization bounds. A sample complexity lower bound shows that our new algorithm uses the minimum possible amount of training data and is thus optimal. Hence, this work settles the sample complexity of the classic problem of constructing a strong learner from a weak learner.
Kasper Green Larsen, Martin Ritzert
NeurIPS2
2022 On the Parameterized Complexity of Learning First-Order Logic
abstract
We analyse the complexity of learning first-order queries in a model-theoretic framework for supervised learning introduced by (Grohe and Turán, TOCS 2004). Previous research on the complexity of learning in this framework focussed on the question of when learning is possible in time sublinear in the background structure.
Steffen van Bergerem, Martin Grohe, Martin Ritzert
PODS3
2019 Weisfeiler and Leman Go Neural: Higher-Order Graph Neural Networks
abstract
In recent years, graph neural networks (GNNs) have emerged as a powerful neural architecture to learn vector representations of nodes and graphs in a supervised, end-to-end fashion. Up to now, GNNs have only been evaluated empirically—showing promising results. The following work investigates GNNs from a theoretical point of view and relates them to the 1-dimensional Weisfeiler-Leman graph isomorphism heuristic (1-WL). We show that GNNs have the same expressiveness as the 1-WL in terms of distinguishing non-isomorphic (sub-)graphs. Hence, both algorithms also have the same shortcomings. Based on this, we propose a generalization of GNNs, so-called k-dimensional GNNs (k-GNNs), which can take higher-order graph structures at multiple scales into account. These higher-order structures play an essential role in the characterization of social networks and molecule graphs. Our experimental evaluation confirms our theoretical findings as well as confirms that higher-order information is useful in the task of graph classification and regression.
Christopher Morris 0001, Martin Ritzert, Matthias Fey, William L. Hamilton, Jan Eric Lenssen, Gaurav Rattan, Martin Grohe
AAAI2
2019 Learning Definable Hypotheses on Trees
abstract
Machine learning is a thriving part of computer science. There are many efficient approaches to machine learning that do not provide strong theoretical guarantees, and a beautiful general learning theory. Unfortunately, machine learning approaches that give strong theoretical guarantees have not been efficient enough to be applicable. In this paper we introduce a logical approach to machine learning. Models are represented by tuples of logical formulas and inputs and outputs are logical structures. We present our framework together with several applications where we evaluate it using SAT and SMT solvers. We argue that this approach to machine learning is particularly suited to bridge the gap between efficiency and theoretical soundness. We exploit results from descriptive complexity theory to prove strong theoretical guarantees for our approach. To show its applicability, we present experimental results including learning complexity-theoretic reductions rules for board games. We also explain how neural networks fit into our framework, although the current implementation does not scale to provide guarantees for real-world neural networks.
Émilie Grienenberger, Martin Ritzert
ICDT2
2017 Learning MSO-definable hypotheses on strings
abstract
We study the classification problems over string data for hypotheses specified by formulas of monadic second-order logic MSO. The goal is to design learning algorithms that run in time polynomial in the size of the training set, independently of or at least sublinear in the size of the whole data set. We prove negative as well as positive results. If the data set is an unprocessed string to which our algorithms have local access, then learning in sublinear time is impossible even for hypotheses definable in a small fragment of first-order logic. If we allow for a linear time pre-processing of the string data to build an index data structure, then learning of MSO-definable hypotheses is possible in time polynomial in the size of the training set, independently of the size of the whole data set.
Martin Grohe, Christof Löding, Martin Ritzert
ALT3
2017 Learning first-order definable concepts over structures of small degree
abstract
We consider a declarative framework for machine learning where concepts and hypotheses are defined by formulas of a logic over some “background structure”. We show that within this framework, concepts defined by first-order formulas over a background structure of at most polylogarithmic degree can be learned in polylogarithmic time in the “probably approximately correct” learning sense.
Martin Grohe, Martin Ritzert
LICS2