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.

Nazarii Tupitsa

dblp:234/8907 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
1as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 1 first-author · 4 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.

Theoretical computer science
3 papers
Mathematical optimization · 100%
Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Optimization for machine learning · 100%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Distributed systems · 100%

Topics — the 18 heaviest of 18, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization
convex optimization
1.422025
Methods for Convex (L0, L1)-Smooth Optimization: Clipping, Acceleration, and Adaptivity · ICLR 2025
On a Combination of Alternating Minimization and Nesterov's Momentum · ICML 2021
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization › convex optimization › first-order methods › gradient-based optimization
accelerated gradient methods
1.222025
Methods for Convex (L0, L1)-Smooth Optimization: Clipping, Acceleration, and Adaptivity · ICLR 2025
On the Complexity of Approximating Wasserstein Barycenters · ICML 2019
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization › convex optimization › first-order methods › gradient-based optimization
adaptive gradient methods
0.912025
Methods for Convex (L0, L1)-Smooth Optimization: Clipping, Acceleration, and Adaptivity · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › stochastic optimization › adaptive gradient methods
adagrad
0.812024
Remove that Square Root: A New Efficient Scale-Invariant Version of AdaGrad · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › stochastic optimization
adaptive gradient methods
0.812024
Remove that Square Root: A New Efficient Scale-Invariant Version of AdaGrad · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
scale-invariant optimization
0.812024
Remove that Square Root: A New Efficient Scale-Invariant Version of AdaGrad · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic optimization
0.812024
Remove that Square Root: A New Efficient Scale-Invariant Version of AdaGrad · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
distributed optimization
0.712023
Byzantine-Tolerant Methods for Distributed Variational Inequalities · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
variational inequality
0.712023
Byzantine-Tolerant Methods for Distributed Variational Inequalities · NeurIPS 2023
Distributed systems › fault tolerance
byzantine fault tolerance
0.712023
Byzantine-Tolerant Methods for Distributed Variational Inequalities · NeurIPS 2023
Distributed systems
fault tolerance
0.712023
Byzantine-Tolerant Methods for Distributed Variational Inequalities · NeurIPS 2023
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization › convex optimization › first-order methods
accelerated first-order methods
0.512021
On a Combination of Alternating Minimization and Nesterov's Momentum · ICML 2021
Mathematical optimization
nonconvex optimization
0.512021
On a Combination of Alternating Minimization and Nesterov's Momentum · ICML 2021
Mathematical optimization › distributed optimization
decentralized optimization
0.412019
On the Complexity of Approximating Wasserstein Barycenters · ICML 2019
Mathematical optimization
distributed optimization
0.412019
On the Complexity of Approximating Wasserstein Barycenters · ICML 2019
Mathematical optimization
gradient descent
0.412019
On the Complexity of Approximating Wasserstein Barycenters · ICML 2019
Mathematical optimization
optimal transport
0.412019
On the Complexity of Approximating Wasserstein Barycenters · ICML 2019
Mathematical optimization › optimal transport
wasserstein barycenter
0.412019
On the Complexity of Approximating Wasserstein Barycenters · ICML 2019

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

distributed optimization · 1.3byzantine-robust methods · 1.3polyak stepsizes · 0.9gradient clipping · 0.9acceleration · 0.9convergence analysis · 0.8adaptive learning rate · 0.8primal-dual method · 0.5nesterov's momentum · 0.5alternating minimization · 0.5proximal gradient · 0.4iterative bregman projection · 0.4entropic regularization · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Methods for Convex (L0, L1)-Smooth Optimization: Clipping, Acceleration, and Adaptivity
abstract
Due to the non-smoothness of optimization problems in Machine Learning, generalized smoothness assumptions have been gaining a lot of attention in recent years. One of the most popular assumptions of this type is $(L_0,L_1)$-smoothness (Zhang et al., 2020). In this paper, we focus on the class of (strongly) convex $(L_0,L_1)$-smooth functions and derive new convergence guarantees for several existing methods. In particular, we derive improved convergence rates for Gradient Descent with (Smoothed) Gradient Clipping and for Gradient Descent with Polyak Stepsizes. In contrast to the existing results, our rates do not rely on the standard smoothness assumption and do not suffer from the exponential dependency on the initial distance to the solution. We also extend these results to the stochastic case under the over-parameterization assumption, propose a new accelerated method for convex $(L_0,L_1)$-smooth optimization, and derive new convergence rates for Adaptive Gradient Descent (Malitsky and Mishchenko, 2020).
Eduard Gorbunov, Nazarii Tupitsa, Sayantan Choudhury, Alen Aliev, Peter Richtárik, Samuel Horváth, Martin Takác 0001
ICLR2
2024 Remove that Square Root: A New Efficient Scale-Invariant Version of AdaGrad
abstract
Adaptive methods are extremely popular in machine learning as they make learning rate tuning less expensive. This paper introduces a novel optimization algorithm named KATE, which presents a scale-invariant adaptation of the well-known AdaGrad algorithm. We prove the scale-invariance of KATE for the case of Generalized Linear Models. Moreover, for general smooth non-convex problems, we establish a convergence rate of $O((\log T)/\sqrt{T})$ for KATE, matching the best-known ones for AdaGrad and Adam. We also compare KATE to other state-of-the-art adaptive algorithms Adam and AdaGrad in numerical experiments with different problems, including complex machine learning tasks like image classification and text classification on real data. The results indicate that KATE consistently outperforms AdaGrad and matches/surpasses the performance of Adam in all considered scenarios.
Sayantan Choudhury, Nazarii Tupitsa, Nicolas Loizou, Samuel Horváth, Martin Takác 0001, Eduard Gorbunov
NeurIPS2
2023 Byzantine-Tolerant Methods for Distributed Variational Inequalities
abstract
Robustness to Byzantine attacks is a necessity for various distributed training scenarios. When the training reduces to the process of solving a minimization problem, Byzantine robustness is relatively well-understood. However, other problem formulations, such as min-max problems or, more generally, variational inequalities, arise in many modern machine learning and, in particular, distributed learning tasks. These problems significantly differ from the standard minimization ones and, therefore, require separate consideration. Nevertheless, only one work [Abidi et al., 2022] addresses this important question in the context of Byzantine robustness. Our work makes a further step in this direction by providing several (provably) Byzantine-robust methods for distributed variational inequality, thoroughly studying their theoretical convergence, removing the limitations of the previous work, and providing numerical comparisons supporting the theoretical findings.
Nazarii Tupitsa, Abdulla Jasem Almansoori, Yanlin Wu, Martin Takác 0001, Karthik Nandakumar, Samuel Horváth, Eduard Gorbunov
NeurIPS1
2021 On a Combination of Alternating Minimization and Nesterov's Momentum
abstract
Alternating minimization (AM) procedures are practically efficient in many applications for solving convex and non-convex optimization problems. On the other hand, Nesterov’s accelerated gradient is theoretically optimal first-order method for convex optimization. In this paper we combine AM and Nesterov’s acceleration to propose an accelerated alternating minimization algorithm. We prove $1/k^2$ convergence rate in terms of the objective for convex problems and $1/k$ in terms of the squared gradient norm for non-convex problems, where $k$ is the iteration counter. Our method does not require any knowledge of neither convexity of the problem nor function parameters such as Lipschitz constant of the gradient, i.e. it is adaptive to convexity and smoothness and is uniformly optimal for smooth convex and non-convex problems. Further, we develop its primal-dual modification for strongly convex problems with linear constraints and prove the same $1/k^2$ for the primal objective residual and constraints feasibility.
Sergey Guminov, Pavel E. Dvurechensky, Nazarii Tupitsa, Alexander V. Gasnikov
ICML3
2019 On the Complexity of Approximating Wasserstein Barycenters
abstract
We study the complexity of approximating the Wasserstein barycenter of $m$ discrete measures, or histograms of size $n$, by contrasting two alternative approaches that use entropic regularization. The first approach is based on the Iterative Bregman Projections (IBP) algorithm for which our novel analysis gives a complexity bound proportional to ${mn^2}/{\varepsilon^2}$ to approximate the original non-regularized barycenter. On the other hand, using an approach based on accelerated gradient descent, we obtain a complexity proportional to ${mn^{2}}/{\varepsilon}$. As a byproduct, we show that the regularization parameter in both approaches has to be proportional to $\varepsilon$, which causes instability of both algorithms when the desired accuracy is high. To overcome this issue, we propose a novel proximal-IBP algorithm, which can be seen as a proximal gradient method, which uses IBP on each iteration to make a proximal step. We also consider the question of scalability of these algorithms using approaches from distributed optimization and show that the first algorithm can be implemented in a centralized distributed setting (master/slave), while the second one is amenable to a more general decentralized distributed setting with an arbitrary network topology.
Alexey Kroshnin, Nazarii Tupitsa, Darina Dvinskikh, Pavel E. Dvurechensky, Alexander V. Gasnikov, César A. Uribe
ICML2