Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kumar Kshitij Patel
dblp:239/8754
· DBLP profile ↗
11ranked-venue papers
4as first author
6since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-6886-6826ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 11 · 4 first-author · 6 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 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
9 papers |
Optimization for machine learning · 62% Efficient and distributed learning · 30% Learning theory · 6% | |
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 90% Approximation and online algorithms · 10% |
Topics — the 23 heaviest of 23, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
distributed optimization |
2.1 | 4 | 2024 | The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024 A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2021 Minibatch vs Local SGD for Heterogeneous Distributed Learning · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › distributed training › communication-efficient distributed SGD
local SGD |
1.6 | 3 | 2024 | The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024 Is Local SGD Better than Minibatch SGD? · ICML 2020 Don't Use Large Mini-batches, Use Local SGD · ICLR 2020 |
Mathematical optimization
stochastic optimization |
1.4 | 2 | 2025 | Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025 Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › stochastic gradient descent
minibatch SGD |
1.2 | 2 | 2024 | The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024 Is Local SGD Better than Minibatch SGD? · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent |
0.9 | 2 | 2024 | The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024 Don't Use Large Mini-batches, Use Local SGD · ICLR 2020 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic optimization |
0.9 | 2 | 2021 | A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2021 Communication trade-offs for Local-SGD with large step size · NeurIPS 2019 |
Mathematical optimization
convergence analysis |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025 |
Mathematical optimization
distributed optimization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025 |
Mathematical optimization › distributed optimization
federated optimization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
distributed training |
0.8 | 2 | 2020 | Don't Use Large Mini-batches, Use Local SGD · ICLR 2020 Communication trade-offs for Local-SGD with large step size · NeurIPS 2019 |
Mathematical optimization › constrained optimization
fairness constraints |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Online Combinatorial Optimization with Group Fairness Constraints · IJCAI 2024 |
Approximation and online algorithms › online algorithms
online combinatorial optimization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Online Combinatorial Optimization with Group Fairness Constraints · IJCAI 2024 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › online optimization
bandit convex optimization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Federated Online and Bandit Convex Optimization · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › online learning
online convex optimization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Federated Online and Bandit Convex Optimization · ICML 2023 |
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization
communication-efficient distributed optimization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022 |
Mathematical optimization › distributed optimization
distributed nonconvex optimization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022 |
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization
variance reduction |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › distributed optimization
distributed convex optimization |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
second-order optimization |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
federated learning |
0.4 | 2 | 2025 | Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025 Minibatch vs Local SGD for Heterogeneous Distributed Learning · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › distributed training
communication-efficient distributed SGD |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Communication trade-offs for Local-SGD with large step size · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness
group fairness |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Online Combinatorial Optimization with Group Fairness Constraints · IJCAI 2024 |
Distributed systems
distributed optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
lower bound analysis · 1.9upper and lower bound analysis · 1.7linear regression · 1.7online optimization · 1.5variance reduction · 1.1data heterogeneity modeling · 0.8zeroth-order feedback · 0.7distributed regret analysis · 0.7stochastic gradient · 0.5quasi-self-concordant analysis · 0.5hessian-vector products · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data HeterogeneityabstractLocal SGD, or Federated Averaging, is one of the most widely used algorithms for distributed optimization. Although it often outperforms alternatives such as mini-batch SGD, existing theory has not fully explained this advantage under realistic assumptions about data heterogeneity. Recent work has suggested that a second-order heterogeneity assumption may suffice to justify the empirical gains of local SGD. We confirm this conjecture by establishing new upper and lower bounds on the convergence of local SGD. These bounds demonstrate how a low second-order heterogeneity, combined with third-order smoothness, enables local SGD to interpolate between heterogeneous and homogeneous regimes while maintaining communication efficiency. Our main technical contribution is a refined analysis of the consensus error, a central quantity in such results. We validate our theory with experiments on a distributed linear regression task. Kumar Kshitij Patel, Ali Zindari, Sebastian U. Stich |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2024 | The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent CommunicationabstractLocal SGD is a popular optimization method in distributed learning, often outperforming mini-batch SGD. Despite this practical success, proving the efficiency of local SGD has been difficult, creating a significant gap between theory and practice. We provide new lower bounds for local SGD under existing first-order data heterogeneity assumptions, showing these assumptions can not capture local SGD’s effectiveness. We also demonstrate the min-max optimality of accelerated mini-batch SGD under these assumptions. Our findings emphasize the need for improved modeling of data heterogeneity. Under higher-order assumptions, we provide new upper bounds that verify the dominance of local SGD over mini-batch SGD when data heterogeneity is low. Kumar Kshitij Patel, Margalit Glasgow, Ali Zindari, Sebastian U. Stich, Nirmit Joshi, Nathan Srebro |
COLT | 1 |
| 2024 | Online Combinatorial Optimization with Group Fairness Constraints
Negin Golrezaei, Rad Niazadeh, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Fransisca Susan |
IJCAI | 3 |
| 2023 | Federated Online and Bandit Convex OptimizationabstractWe study the problems of *distributed online and bandit convex optimization* against an adaptive adversary. We aim to minimize the average regret on $M$ machines working in parallel over $T$ rounds with $R$ intermittent communications. Assuming the underlying cost functions are convex and can be generated adaptively, our results show that *collaboration is not beneficial when the machines have access to the first-order gradient information at the queried points*. This is in contrast to the case for stochastic functions, where each machine samples the cost functions from a fixed distribution. Furthermore, we delve into the more challenging setting of *federated online optimization with bandit (zeroth-order) feedback*, where the machines can only access values of the cost functions at the queried points. The key finding here is *identifying the high-dimensional regime where collaboration is beneficial and may even lead to a linear speedup in the number of machines*. We further illustrate our findings through federated adversarial linear bandits by developing novel distributed single and two-point feedback algorithms. Our work is the first attempt towards a systematic understanding of federated online optimization with limited feedback, and it attains tight regret bounds in the intermittent communication setting for both first and zeroth-order feedback. Our results thus bridge the gap between stochastic and adaptive settings in federated online optimization. Kumar Kshitij Patel, Aadirupa Saha, Nathan Srebro |
ICML | 1 |
| 2022 | Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex OptimizationabstractWe study the problem of distributed stochastic non-convex optimization with intermittent communication. We consider the full participation setting where $M$ machines work in parallel over $R$ communication rounds and the partial participation setting where $M$ machines are sampled independently every round from some meta-distribution over machines. We propose and analyze a new algorithm that improves existing methods by requiring fewer and lighter variance reduction operations. We also present lower bounds, showing our algorithm is either $\textit{optimal}$ or $\textit{almost optimal}$ in most settings. Numerical experiments demonstrate the superior performance of our algorithm. Kumar Kshitij Patel, Blake E. Woodworth, Brian Bullins, Nathan Srebro |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2021 | A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex OptimizationabstractWe propose and analyze a stochastic Newton algorithm for homogeneous distributed stochastic convex optimization, where each machine can calculate stochastic gradients of the same population objective, as well as stochastic Hessian-vector products (products of an independent unbiased estimator of the Hessian of the population objective with arbitrary vectors), with many such stochastic computations performed between rounds of communication. We show that our method can reduce the number, and frequency, of required communication rounds, compared to existing methods without hurting performance, by proving convergence guarantees for quasi-self-concordant objectives (e.g., logistic regression), alongside empirical evidence. Brian Bullins, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Ohad Shamir, Nathan Srebro, Blake E. Woodworth |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2020 | Don't Use Large Mini-batches, Use Local SGD
Tao Lin 0004, Sebastian U. Stich, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Martin Jaggi |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2020 | Is Local SGD Better than Minibatch SGD?abstractWe study local SGD (also known as parallel SGD and federated SGD), a natural and frequently used distributed optimization method. Its theoretical foundations are currently lacking and we highlight how all existing error guarantees in the convex setting are dominated by a simple baseline, minibatch SGD. (1) For quadratic objectives we prove that local SGD strictly dominates minibatch SGD and that accelerated local SGD is minmax optimal for quadratics; (2) For general convex objectives we provide the first guarantee that at least \emph{sometimes} improves over minibatch SGD, but our guarantee does not always improve over, nor even match, minibatch SGD; (3) We show that indeed local SGD does \emph{not} dominate minibatch SGD by presenting a lower bound on the performance of local SGD that is worse than the minibatch SGD guarantee. Blake E. Woodworth, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Sebastian U. Stich, Brian Bullins, H. Brendan McMahan, Ohad Shamir, Nathan Srebro |
ICML | 2 |
| 2020 | Minibatch vs Local SGD for Heterogeneous Distributed LearningabstractWe analyze Local SGD (aka parallel or federated SGD) and Minibatch SGD in the heterogeneous distributed setting, where each machine has access to stochastic gradient estimates for a different, machine-specific, convex objective; the goal is to optimize w.r.t.~the average objective; and machines can only communicate intermittently. We argue that, (i) Minibatch SGD (even without acceleration) dominates all existing analysis of Local SGD in this setting, (ii) accelerated Minibatch SGD is optimal when the heterogeneity is high, and (iii) present the first upper bound for Local SGD that improves over Minibatch SGD in a non-homogeneous regime. Blake E. Woodworth, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Nathan Srebro |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2019 | Communication trade-offs for Local-SGD with large step sizeabstractSynchronous mini-batch SGD is state-of-the-art for large-scale distributed machine learning. However, in practice, its convergence is bottlenecked by slow communication rounds between worker nodes. A natural solution to reduce communication is to use the \emph{``local-SGD''} model in which the workers train their model independently and synchronize every once in a while. This algorithm improves the computation-communication trade-off but its convergence is not understood very well. We propose a non-asymptotic error analysis, which enables comparison to \emph{one-shot averaging} i.e., a single communication round among independent workers, and \emph{mini-batch averaging} i.e., communicating at every step. We also provide adaptive lower bounds on the communication frequency for large step-sizes ($ t^{-\alpha} $, $ \alpha\in (1/2 , 1 ) $) and show that \emph{Local-SGD} reduces communication by a factor of $O\Big(\frac{\sqrt{T}}{P^{3/2}}\Big)$, with $T$ the total number of gradients and $P$ machines. Aymeric Dieuleveut, Kumar Kshitij Patel |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2019 | Corruption-tolerant bandit learning
Sayash Kapoor, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Purushottam Kar |
Mach. Learn. | 2 |