EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Anant Subramanian
dblp:210/0836
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-authorApplied, 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.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Information retrieval · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 67% Representation and self-supervised learning · 33% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Information retrieval › text analysis
keyword extraction |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Natural Language Annotations for Search Engine Optimization · WWW 2020 |
Information retrieval
query understanding |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Natural Language Annotations for Search Engine Optimization · WWW 2020 |
Information retrieval › web search
search engine optimization |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Natural Language Annotations for Search Engine Optimization · WWW 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | SPINE: SParse Interpretable Neural Embeddings · AAAI 2018 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › explainable AI
interpretable representation |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | SPINE: SParse Interpretable Neural Embeddings · AAAI 2018 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › word representation
word embedding |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | SPINE: SParse Interpretable Neural Embeddings · AAAI 2018 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
logistic regression · 0.4XGBoost · 0.4denoising k-sparse autoencoders · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | Natural Language Annotations for Search Engine OptimizationabstractUnderstanding content at scale is a difficult but important problem for many platforms. Many previous studies focus on content understanding to optimize engagement with existing users. However, little work studies how to leverage better content understanding to attract new users. In this work, we build a framework for generating natural language content annotations and show how they can be used for search engine optimization. The proposed framework relies on an XGBoost model that labels “pins” with high probability phrases, and a logistic regression layer that learns to rank aggregated annotations for groups of content. The pipeline identifies keywords that are descriptive and contextually meaningful. We perform a large-scale production experiment deployed on the Pinterest platform and show that natural language annotations cause a 1-2% increase in traffic from leading search engines. This increase is statistically significant. Finally, we explore and interpret the characteristics of our annotations framework. Porter Jenkins, Jennifer Zhao, Heath Vinicombe, Anant Subramanian, Arun Prasad, Atillia Dobi, Eileen Li, Yunsong Guo |
WWW | 4 |
| 2018 | SPINE: SParse Interpretable Neural EmbeddingsabstractPrediction without justification has limited utility. Much of the success of neural models can be attributed to their ability to learn rich, dense and expressive representations. While these representations capture the underlying complexity and latent trends in the data, they are far from being interpretable. We propose a novel variant of denoising k-sparse autoencoders that generates highly efficient and interpretable distributed word representations (word embeddings), beginning with existing word representations from state-of-the-art methods like GloVe and word2vec. Through large scale human evaluation, we report that our resulting word embedddings are much more interpretable than the original GloVe and word2vec embeddings. Moreover, our embeddings outperform existing popular word embeddings on a diverse suite of benchmark downstream tasks. Anant Subramanian, Danish Pruthi, Harsh Jhamtani, Taylor Berg-Kirkpatrick, Eduard H. Hovy |
AAAI | 1 |