Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Frederik Kunstner
dblp:230/3921
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
7as first author
6since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-4213-1944ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 9 · 7 first-author · 6 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
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
8 papers |
Optimization for machine learning · 49% Deep learning architectures and training · 24% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 19% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 21 heaviest of 22, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training optimization |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Scaling Laws for Gradient Descent and Sign Descent for Linear Bigram Models under Zipf's Law · NeurIPS 2025 Heavy-Tailed Class Imbalance and Why Adam Outperforms Gradient Descent on Language Models · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
preconditioning |
1.0 | 2 | 2023 | Searching for Optimal Per-Coordinate Step-sizes with Multidimensional Backtracking · NeurIPS 2023 Limitations of the empirical Fisher approximation for natural gradient descent · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
convergence analysis |
0.8 | 2 | 2025 | Homeomorphic-Invariance of EM: Non-Asymptotic Convergence in KL Divergence for Exponential Families via Mirror Descent (Extended Abstract) · IJCAI 2022 Scaling Laws for Gradient Descent and Sign Descent for Linear Bigram Models under Zipf's Law · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
second-order optimization |
0.8 | 2 | 2020 | BackPACK: Packing more into Backprop · ICLR 2020 Limitations of the empirical Fisher approximation for natural gradient descent · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
adaptive optimization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Heavy-Tailed Class Imbalance and Why Adam Outperforms Gradient Descent on Language Models · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
class imbalance |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Heavy-Tailed Class Imbalance and Why Adam Outperforms Gradient Descent on Language Models · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › gradient-based optimization › gradient descent
natural gradient descent |
0.7 | 2 | 2019 | Limitations of the empirical Fisher approximation for natural gradient descent · NeurIPS 2019 SLANG: Fast Structured Covariance Approximations for Bayesian Deep Learning with Natural Gradient · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › adaptive optimization
adaptive learning rate |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Searching for Optimal Per-Coordinate Step-sizes with Multidimensional Backtracking · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training dynamics |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Noise Is Not the Main Factor Behind the Gap Between Sgd and Adam on Transformers, But Sign Descent Might Be · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › parameter estimation
expectation-maximization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Homeomorphic-Invariance of EM: Non-Asymptotic Convergence in KL Divergence for Exponential Families via Mirror Descent (Extended Abstract) · IJCAI 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › parameter estimation
expectation-maximization convergence |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Homeomorphic-Invariance of EM: Non-Asymptotic Convergence in KL Divergence for Exponential Families via Mirror Descent (Extended Abstract) · IJCAI 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
exponential family |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Homeomorphic-Invariance of EM: Non-Asymptotic Convergence in KL Divergence for Exponential Families via Mirror Descent (Extended Abstract) · IJCAI 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
latent variable model |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Homeomorphic-Invariance of EM: Non-Asymptotic Convergence in KL Divergence for Exponential Families via Mirror Descent (Extended Abstract) · IJCAI 2022 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
backpropagation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | BackPACK: Packing more into Backprop · ICLR 2020 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
gradient computation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | BackPACK: Packing more into Backprop · ICLR 2020 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › second-order optimization › hessian approximation
fisher information matrix approximation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Limitations of the empirical Fisher approximation for natural gradient descent · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | SLANG: Fast Structured Covariance Approximations for Bayesian Deep Learning with Natural Gradient · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | SLANG: Fast Structured Covariance Approximations for Bayesian Deep Learning with Natural Gradient · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › training dynamics
optimization dynamics |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Heavy-Tailed Class Imbalance and Why Adam Outperforms Gradient Descent on Language Models · NeurIPS 2024 |
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization
convex optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Searching for Optimal Per-Coordinate Step-sizes with Multidimensional Backtracking · NeurIPS 2023 |
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization › convex optimization
smooth convex optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Searching for Optimal Per-Coordinate Step-sizes with Multidimensional Backtracking · NeurIPS 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
zipf's law analysis · 0.9scaling law derivation · 0.9backpropagation · 0.8gradient-hessian correlation analysis · 0.8convergence analysis · 0.8sign descent · 0.7hypergradient computation · 0.7hyper-gradient computation · 0.7cutting-plane method · 0.7cutting plane method · 0.7adam · 0.7SGD · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Scaling Laws for Gradient Descent and Sign Descent for Linear Bigram Models under Zipf's LawabstractRecent works have highlighted the optimization difficulties encountered by gradient descent in training the first and last layer of transformer-based language models, which are overcome by optimizers such as Adam. The problem appears linked to the heavy-tailed distribution of words in text data, where the frequency of the $k$th most frequent word $\pi_k$ is proportional to $1/k$, following Zipf's law. To better understand the impact of the data distribution on training performance, we study a linear bigram model for next-token prediction when the tokens follow a power-law $\pi_k \propto 1/k^\alpha$ parameterized by the exponent $\alpha$. We derive optimization scaling laws for deterministic gradient descent and sign descent as a proxy for Adam as a function of the power $\alpha \geq 0$. This setting differs from existing theoretical investigations in scaling laws which assume that the eigenvalues of the data decay as a power with power $\alpha > 1$. This assumption effectively makes the problem "finite dimensional" as most of the loss comes from a few of the largest eigencomponents. In comparison, we show that the problem is more difficult when the data have heavier tails. The case $\alpha = 1$ as found in text is ``worst-case'' for gradient descent, in that the number of iterations required to reach a small relative error scales almost linearly with dimension. While the performance of sign descent also depends on the dimension, for Zipf-distributed data the number of iterations scales only with the square-root of the dimension, leading to a large improvement over gradient descent for large vocabularies. Frederik Kunstner, Francis R. Bach |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2024 | Heavy-Tailed Class Imbalance and Why Adam Outperforms Gradient Descent on Language ModelsabstractAdam has been shown to outperform gradient descent on large language models by a larger margin than on other tasks, but it is unclear why. We show that a key factor in this performance gap is the heavy-tailed class imbalance found in language tasks. When trained with gradient descent, the loss of infrequent words decreases more slowly than the loss of frequent ones. This leads to a slow decrease on the average loss as most samples come from infrequent words. On the other hand, Adam and sign-based methods are less sensitive to this problem. To establish that this behavior is caused by class imbalance, we show empirically that it can be reproduced across architectures and data types, on language transformers, vision CNNs, and linear models. On a linear model with cross-entropy loss, we show that class imbalance leads to imbalanced, correlated gradients and Hessians that have been hypothesized to benefit Adam. We also prove that, in continuous time, gradient descent converges slowly on low-frequency classes while sign descent does not. Frederik Kunstner, Alan Milligan, Robin Yadav, Mark Schmidt 0001, Alberto Bietti |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2023 | Noise Is Not the Main Factor Behind the Gap Between Sgd and Adam on Transformers, But Sign Descent Might Be
Frederik Kunstner, Jacques Chen, J. Wilder Lavington, Mark Schmidt 0001 |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2023 | Searching for Optimal Per-Coordinate Step-sizes with Multidimensional BacktrackingabstractThe backtracking line-search is an effective technique to automatically tune the step-size in smooth optimization. It guarantees similar performance to using the theoretically optimal step-size. Many approaches have been developed to instead tune per-coordinate step-sizes, also known as diagonal preconditioners, but none of the existing methods are provably competitive with the optimal per-coordinate step-sizes. We propose multidimensional backtracking, an extension of the backtracking line-search to find good diagonal preconditioners for smooth convex problems. Our key insight is that the gradient with respect to the step-sizes, also known as hyper-gradients, yields separating hyperplanes that let us search for good preconditioners using cutting-plane methods. As black-box cutting-plane approaches like the ellipsoid method are computationally prohibitive, we develop an efficient algorithm tailored to our setting. Multidimensional backtracking is provably competitive with the best diagonal preconditioner and requires no manual tuning. Frederik Kunstner, Victor S. Portella, Mark Schmidt 0001, Nicholas J. A. Harvey |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2022 | Homeomorphic-Invariance of EM: Non-Asymptotic Convergence in KL Divergence for Exponential Families via Mirror Descent (Extended Abstract)abstractExpectation maximization (EM) is the default algorithm for fitting probabilistic models with missing or latent variables, yet we lack a full understanding of its non-asymptotic convergence properties. Previous works show results along the lines of “EM converges at least as fast as gradient descent” by assuming the conditions for the convergence of gradient descent apply. This approach is not only loose, in that it does not capture that EM can make more progress than a gradient step, but the assumptions fail to hold for textbook examples of EM like Gaussian mixtures. In this work, we show that for the common setting of exponential family distributions, viewing EM as a mirror descent algorithm leads to convergence rates in Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence and how the KL divergence is related to first-order stationarity via Bregman divergences. In contrast to previous works, the analysis is invariant to the choice of parametrization and holds with minimal assumptions. We also show applications of these ideas to local linear (and superlinear) convergence rates, generalized EM, and non-exponential family distributions. Frederik Kunstner, Raunak Kumar, Mark Schmidt 0001 |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 2021 | Homeomorphic-Invariance of EM: Non-Asymptotic Convergence in KL Divergence for Exponential Families via Mirror DescentabstractExpectation maximization (EM) is the default algorithm for fitting probabilistic models with missing or latent variables, yet we lack a full understanding of its non-asymptotic convergence properties. Previous works show results along the lines of "EM converges at least as fast as gradient descent" by assuming the conditions for the convergence of gradient descent apply to EM. This approach is not only loose, in that it does not capture that EM can make more progress than a gradient step, but the assumptions fail to hold for textbook examples of EM like Gaussian mixtures. In this work we first show that for the common setting of exponential family distributions, viewing EM as a mirror descent algorithm leads to convergence rates in Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence. Then, we show how the KL divergence is related to first-order stationarity via Bregman divergences. In contrast to previous works, the analysis is invariant to the choice of parametrization and holds with minimal assumptions. We also show applications of these ideas to local linear (and superlinear) convergence rates, generalized EM, and non-exponential family distributions. Frederik Kunstner, Raunak Kumar, Mark Schmidt 0001 |
AISTATS | 1 |
| 2020 | BackPACK: Packing more into Backprop
Felix Dangel, Frederik Kunstner, Philipp Hennig |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2019 | Limitations of the empirical Fisher approximation for natural gradient descentabstractNatural gradient descent, which preconditions a gradient descent update with the Fisher information matrix of the underlying statistical model, is a way to capture partial second-order information. Several highly visible works have advocated an approximation known as the empirical Fisher, drawing connections between approximate second-order methods and heuristics like Adam. We dispute this argument by showing that the empirical Fisher---unlike the Fisher---does not generally capture second-order information. We further argue that the conditions under which the empirical Fisher approaches the Fisher (and the Hessian) are unlikely to be met in practice, and that, even on simple optimization problems, the pathologies of the empirical Fisher can have undesirable effects. Frederik Kunstner, Philipp Hennig, Lukas Balles |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2018 | SLANG: Fast Structured Covariance Approximations for Bayesian Deep Learning with Natural GradientabstractUncertainty estimation in large deep-learning models is a computationally challenging task, where it is difficult to form even a Gaussian approximation to the posterior distribution. In such situations, existing methods usually resort to a diagonal approximation of the covariance matrix despite the fact that these matrices are known to give poor uncertainty estimates. To address this issue, we propose a new stochastic, low-rank, approximate natural-gradient (SLANG) method for variational inference in large deep models. Our method estimates a “diagonal plus low-rank” structure based solely on back-propagated gradients of the network log-likelihood. This requires strictly less gradient computations than methods that compute the gradient of the whole variational objective. Empirical evaluations on standard benchmarks confirm that SLANG enables faster and more accurate estimation of uncertainty than mean-field methods, and performs comparably to state-of-the-art methods. Aaron Mishkin, Frederik Kunstner, Didrik Nielsen, Mark Schmidt 0001, Mohammad Emtiyaz Khan |
NeurIPS | 2 |