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

Taman Narayan

dblp:222/1964 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as 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 · 3

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
3 papers
Trustworthy machine learning · 72% Optimization for machine learning · 19% 3D vision · 9%

Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.822020
Multidimensional Shape Constraints · ICML 2020
Shape Constraints for Set Functions · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
shape constraints
0.822020
Multidimensional Shape Constraints · ICML 2020
Shape Constraints for Set Functions · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
distribution shift
0.412020
Multidimensional Shape Constraints · ICML 2020
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.412020
Multidimensional Shape Constraints · ICML 2020
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
constrained optimization
0.412019
Optimization with Non-Differentiable Constraints with Applications to Fairness, Recall, Churn, and Other Goals · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness
0.412019
Optimization with Non-Differentiable Constraints with Applications to Fairness, Recall, Churn, and Other Goals · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › constrained optimization
non-convex constrained optimization
0.412019
Optimization with Non-Differentiable Constraints with Applications to Fairness, Recall, Churn, and Other Goals · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019
Computer vision › 3D vision › geometric deep learning
set functions
0.412019
Shape Constraints for Set Functions · ICML 2019

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

lattice model · 0.4generalized additive model · 0.4semi-coarse correlated equilibrium · 0.4proxy-lagrangian · 0.4monotonic constraints · 0.4game theory · 0.4deep lattice networks · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Multidimensional Shape Constraints
abstract
We propose new multi-input shape constraints across four intuitive categories: complements, diminishers, dominance, and unimodality constraints. We show these shape constraints can be checked and even enforced when training machine-learned models for linear models, generalized additive models, and the nonlinear function class of multi-layer lattice models. Real-world experiments illustrate how the different shape constraints can be used to increase explainability and improve regularization, especially for non-IID train-test distribution shift.
Maya R. Gupta, Erez Louidor, Alexander Mangylov, Nobuyuki Morioka, Taman Narayan
ICML5
2019 Shape Constraints for Set Functions
abstract
Set functions predict a label from a permutation-invariant variable-size collection of feature vectors. We propose making set functions more understandable and regularized by capturing domain knowledge through shape constraints. We show how prior work in monotonic constraints can be adapted to set functions, and then propose two new shape constraints designed to generalize the conditioning role of weights in a weighted mean. We show how one can train standard functions and set functions that satisfy these shape constraints with a deep lattice network. We propose a nonlinear estimation strategy we call the semantic feature engine that uses set functions with the proposed shape constraints to estimate labels for compound sparse categorical features. Experiments on real-world data show the achieved accuracy is similar to deep sets or deep neural networks, but provides guarantees on the model behavior, which makes it easier to explain and debug.
Andrew Cotter, Maya R. Gupta, Heinrich Jiang, Erez Louidor, James Muller, Taman Narayan, Serena Lutong Wang, Tao Zhu 0005
ICML6
2019 Optimization with Non-Differentiable Constraints with Applications to Fairness, Recall, Churn, and Other Goals
abstract
We show that many machine learning goals can be expressed as “rate constraints” on a model's predictions. We study the problem of training non-convex models subject to these rate constraints (or other non-convex or non-differentiable constraints). In the non-convex setting, the standard approach of Lagrange multipliers may fail. Furthermore, if the constraints are non-differentiable, then one cannot optimize the Lagrangian with gradient-based methods. To solve these issues, we introduce a new “proxy-Lagrangian” formulation. This leads to an algorithm that, assuming access to an optimization oracle, produces a stochastic classifier by playing a two-player non-zero-sum game solving for what we call a semi-coarse correlated equilibrium, which in turn corresponds to an approximately optimal and feasible solution to the constrained optimization problem. We then give a procedure that shrinks the randomized solution down to a mixture of at most $m+1$ deterministic solutions, given $m$ constraints. This culminates in a procedure that can solve non-convex constrained optimization problems with possibly non-differentiable and non-convex constraints, and enjoys theoretical guarantees. We provide extensive experimental results covering a broad range of policy goals, including various fairness metrics, accuracy, coverage, recall, and churn.
Andrew Cotter, Heinrich Jiang, Maya R. Gupta, Serena Lutong Wang, Taman Narayan, Seungil You, Karthik Sridharan
J. Mach. Learn. Res.5