Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Milan Shen
dblp:203/6578
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as 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 · 3 · 2 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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
2 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 67% Optimization for machine learning · 33% | |
| Network and information security
2 papers |
Privacy and data protection · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 77% Mathematical optimization · 23% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100% |
Topics — the 9 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy |
1.3 | 2 | 2023 | DP-HyPO: An Adaptive Private Framework for Hyperparameter Optimization · NeurIPS 2023 Federated Linear Contextual Bandits with User-level Differential Privacy · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › bandit
contextual bandit |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Federated Linear Contextual Bandits with User-level Differential Privacy · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › bandit › contextual bandit
federated linear contextual bandits |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Federated Linear Contextual Bandits with User-level Differential Privacy · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
hyperparameter optimization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | DP-HyPO: An Adaptive Private Framework for Hyperparameter Optimization · NeurIPS 2023 |
Privacy and data protection › privacy analysis › privacy models
user-level differential privacy |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Federated Linear Contextual Bandits with User-level Differential Privacy · ICML 2023 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › algorithmic mechanism design
online mechanism design |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Federated Linear Contextual Bandits with User-level Differential Privacy · ICML 2023 |
Computational social science and digital humanities
online controlled experiments |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Winner's Curse: Bias Estimation for Total Effects of Features in Online Controlled Experiments · KDD 2018 |
Mathematical optimization
statistical estimation |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | Winner's Curse: Bias Estimation for Total Effects of Features in Online Controlled Experiments · KDD 2018 |
Mathematical optimization › statistical estimation › point estimation
unbiased estimation |
0.1 | 1 | 2018 | Winner's Curse: Bias Estimation for Total Effects of Features in Online Controlled Experiments · KDD 2018 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
upper and lower regret bounds · 2.0hedge · 2.0gaussian process · 1.3differential privacy · 1.3statistical inference · 0.7hypothesis testing · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Federated Linear Contextual Bandits with User-level Differential PrivacyabstractThis paper studies federated linear contextual bandits under the notion of user-level differential privacy (DP). We first introduce a unified federated bandits framework that can accommodate various definitions of DP in the sequential decision-making setting. We then formally introduce user-level central DP (CDP) and local DP (LDP) in the federated bandits framework, and investigate the fundamental trade-offs between the learning regrets and the corresponding DP guarantees in a federated linear contextual bandits model. For CDP, we propose a federated algorithm termed as $\texttt{ROBIN}$ and show that it is near-optimal in terms of the number of clients $M$ and the privacy budget $\varepsilon$ by deriving nearly-matching upper and lower regret bounds when user-level DP is satisfied. For LDP, we obtain several lower bounds, indicating that learning under user-level $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-LDP must suffer a regret blow-up factor at least $\min\{1/\varepsilon,M\}$ or $\min\{1/\sqrt{\varepsilon},\sqrt{M}\}$ under different conditions. Ruiquan Huang, Luca Melis, Milan Shen, Meisam Hejazinia, Jing Yang 0002 |
ICML | 4 |
| 2023 | DP-HyPO: An Adaptive Private Framework for Hyperparameter OptimizationabstractHyperparameter optimization, also known as hyperparameter tuning, is a widely recognized technique for improving model performance. Regrettably, when training private ML models, many practitioners often overlook the privacy risks associated with hyperparameter optimization, which could potentially expose sensitive information about the underlying dataset.
Currently, the sole existing approach to allow privacy-preserving hyperparameter optimization is to uniformly and randomly select hyperparameters for a number of runs, subsequently reporting the best-performing hyperparameter.
In contrast, in non-private settings, practitioners commonly utilize "adaptive" hyperparameter optimization methods such as Gaussian Process-based optimization, which select the next candidate based on information gathered from previous outputs.
This substantial contrast between private and non-private hyperparameter optimization underscores a critical concern. In our paper, we introduce DP-HyPO, a pioneering framework for "adaptive" private hyperparameter optimization, aiming to bridge the gap between private and non-private hyperparameter optimization. To accomplish this, we provide a comprehensive differential privacy analysis of our framework. Furthermore, we empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of DP-HyPO on a diverse set of real-world datasets. Sheng Gao 0003, Weijie J. Su, Milan Shen |
NeurIPS | 5 |
| 2018 | Winner's Curse: Bias Estimation for Total Effects of Features in Online Controlled ExperimentsabstractOnline controlled experiments, or A/B testing, has been a standard framework adopted by most online product companies to measure the effect of any new change. Companies use various statistical methods including hypothesis testing and statistical inference to quantify the business impact of the changes and make product decisions. Nowadays, experimentation platforms can run as many as hundreds or even more experiments concurrently. When a group of experiments is conducted, usually the ones with significant successful results are chosen to be launched into the product. We are interested in learning the aggregated impact of the launched features. In this paper, we investigate a statistical selection bias in this process and propose a correction method of getting an unbiased estimator. Moreover, we give an implementation example at Airbnb's ERF platform (Experiment Reporting Framework) and discuss the best practices to account for this bias. Minyong R. Lee, Milan Shen |
KDD | 2 |