Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Omer Hadad
dblp:201/7717
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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
1 paper |
Efficient and distributed learning · 91% Deep learning architectures and training · 9% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression › pruning › structured pruning
channel pruning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | UPSCALE: Unconstrained Channel Pruning · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › inference acceleration
inference latency reduction |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | UPSCALE: Unconstrained Channel Pruning · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | UPSCALE: Unconstrained Channel Pruning · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › feedforward neural network
multi-branch network |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | UPSCALE: Unconstrained Channel Pruning · ICML 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
unconstrained pruning · 0.7channel reordering · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | UPSCALE: Unconstrained Channel PruningabstractAs neural networks grow in size and complexity, inference speeds decline. To combat this, one of the most effective compression techniques -- channel pruning -- removes channels from weights. However, for multi-branch segments of a model, channel removal can introduce inference-time memory copies. In turn, these copies increase inference latency -- so much so that the pruned model can be slower than the unpruned model. As a workaround, pruners conventionally constrain certain channels to be pruned together. This fully eliminates memory copies but, as we show, significantly impairs accuracy. We now have a dilemma: Remove constraints but increase latency, or add constraints and impair accuracy. In response, our insight is to reorder channels at export time, (1) reducing latency by reducing memory copies and (2) improving accuracy by removing constraints. Using this insight, we design a generic algorithm UPSCALE to prune models with any pruning pattern. By removing constraints from existing pruners, we improve ImageNet accuracy for post-training pruned models by 2.1 points on average -- benefiting DenseNet (+16.9), EfficientNetV2 (+7.9), and ResNet (+6.2). Furthermore, by reordering channels, UPSCALE improves inference speeds by up to 2x over a baseline export. Alvin Wan, Hanxiang Hao, Kaushik Patnaik, Yueyang Xu, Omer Hadad, David Guera, Zhile Ren, Qi Shan |
ICML | 5 |
| 2017 | Hybrid Mass Detection in Breast MRI Combining Unsupervised Saliency Analysis and Deep Learning
Guy Amit, Omer Hadad, Sharon Alpert, Tal Tlusty, Yaniv Gur, Rami Ben-Ari, Sharbell Y. Hashoul |
MICCAI (3) | 2 |