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

Nisha Chandramoorthy

dblp:236/5726 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
3as 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 · 4 · 3 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.

Artificial intelligence
3 papers
Learning theory · 43% Generative modeling · 39% Deep learning architectures and training · 18%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational science and engineering · 100%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model
score-based generative model
0.912025
When and how can inexact generative models still sample from the data manifold? · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization
0.812024
When are dynamical systems learned from time series data statistically accurate? · NeurIPS 2024
Computational science and engineering › dynamical systems
dynamical system learning
0.812024
When are dynamical systems learned from time series data statistically accurate? · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization bounds
algorithmic stability
0.612022
On the generalization of learning algorithms that do not converge · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization
generalization theory
0.612022
On the generalization of learning algorithms that do not converge · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › neural differential equations
neural ordinary differential equations
0.212024
When are dynamical systems learned from time series data statistically accurate? · NeurIPS 2024

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

ergodic theory · 2.1jacobian information · 1.5perturbation analysis · 0.9lyapunov vector analysis · 0.9dynamical systems analysis · 0.9stochastic gradient descent · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 When and how can inexact generative models still sample from the data manifold?
abstract
A curious phenomenon observed in some dynamical generative models is the following: despite learning errors in the score function or the drift vector field, the generated samples appear to shift \emph{along} the support of the data distribution but not \emph{away} from it. In this work, we investigate this phenomenon of \emph{robustness of the support} by taking a dynamical systems approach on the generating stochastic/deterministic process. Our perturbation analysis of the probability flow reveals that infinitesimal learning errors cause the predicted density to be different from the target density only on the data manifold for a wide class of generative models. Further, what is the dynamical mechanism that leads to the robustness of the support? We show that the alignment of the top Lyapunov vectors (most sensitive infinitesimal perturbation directions) with the tangent spaces along the boundary of the data manifold leads to robustness and prove a sufficient condition on the dynamics of the generating process to achieve this alignment. Moreover, the alignment condition is efficient to compute and, in practice, for robust generative models, automatically leads to accurate estimates of the tangent bundle of the data manifold. Using a finite-time linear perturbation analysis on samples paths as well as probability flows, our work complements and extends existing works on obtaining theoretical guarantees for generative models from a stochastic analysis, statistical learning and uncertainty quantification points of view. Our results apply across different dynamical generative models, such as conditional flow-matching and score-based generative models, and for different target distributions that may or may not satisfy the manifold hypothesis.
Nisha Chandramoorthy, Adriaan de Clercq
NeurIPS1
2024 Score Operator Newton transport
abstract
We propose a new approach for sampling and Bayesian computation that uses the score of the target distribution to construct a transport from a given reference distribution to the target. Our approach is an infinite-dimensional Newton method, involving an elliptic PDE, for finding a zero of a “score-residual” operator. We prove sufficient conditions for convergence to a valid transport map. Our Newton iterates can be computed by exploiting fast solvers for elliptic PDEs, resulting in new algorithms for Bayesian inference and other sampling tasks. We identify elementary settings where score-operator Newton transport achieves fast convergence while avoiding mode collapse.
Nisha Chandramoorthy, Florian Schäfer 0001, Youssef Marzouk 0001
AISTATS1
2024 When are dynamical systems learned from time series data statistically accurate?
abstract
Conventional notions of generalization often fail to describe the ability of learned models to capture meaningful information from dynamical data. A neural network that learns complex dynamics with a small test error may still fail to reproduce its \emph{physical} behavior, including associated statistical moments and Lyapunov exponents. To address this gap, we propose an ergodic theoretic approach to generalization of complex dynamical models learned from time series data. Our main contribution is to define and analyze generalization of a broad suite of neural representations of classes of ergodic systems, including chaotic systems, in a way that captures emulating underlying invariant, physical measures. Our results provide theoretical justification for why regression methods for generators of dynamical systems (Neural ODEs) fail to generalize, and why their statistical accuracy improves upon adding Jacobian information during training. We verify our results on a number of ergodic chaotic systems and neural network parameterizations, including MLPs, ResNets, Fourier Neural layers, and RNNs.
Jeongjin Park, Nicole Yang, Nisha Chandramoorthy
NeurIPS3
2022 On the generalization of learning algorithms that do not converge
abstract
Generalization analyses of deep learning typically assume that the training converges to a fixed point. But, recent results indicate that in practice, the weights of deep neural networks optimized with stochastic gradient descent often oscillate indefinitely. To reduce this discrepancy between theory and practice, this paper focuses on the generalization of neural networks whose training dynamics do not necessarily converge to fixed points. Our main contribution is to propose a notion of statistical algorithmic stability (SAS) that extends classical algorithmic stability to non-convergent algorithms and to study its connection to generalization. This ergodic-theoretic approach leads to new insights when compared to the traditional optimization and learning theory perspectives. We prove that the stability of the time-asymptotic behavior of a learning algorithm relates to its generalization and empirically demonstrate how loss dynamics can provide clues to generalization performance. Our findings provide evidence that networks that ``train stably generalize better'' even when the training continues indefinitely and the weights do not converge.
Nisha Chandramoorthy, Andreas Loukas, Khashayar Gatmiry, Stefanie Jegelka
NeurIPS1