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

Manu Srinath Halvagal

dblp:241/3481 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
1 paper
Representation and self-supervised learning · 87% Deep learning architectures and training · 13%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning › self-supervised representation learning
non-contrastive self-supervised learning
0.712023
Implicit variance regularization in non-contrastive SSL · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation analysis
representation collapse
0.712023
Implicit variance regularization in non-contrastive SSL · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
loss function design
0.212023
Implicit variance regularization in non-contrastive SSL · NeurIPS 2023

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

isotropic loss · 0.7implicit variance regularization · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Implicit variance regularization in non-contrastive SSL
abstract
Non-contrastive SSL methods like BYOL and SimSiam rely on asymmetric predictor networks to avoid representational collapse without negative samples. Yet, how predictor networks facilitate stable learning is not fully understood. While previous theoretical analyses assumed Euclidean losses, most practical implementations rely on cosine similarity. To gain further theoretical insight into non-contrastive SSL, we analytically study learning dynamics in conjunction with Euclidean and cosine similarity in the eigenspace of closed-form linear predictor networks. We show that both avoid collapse through implicit variance regularization albeit through different dynamical mechanisms. Moreover, we find that the eigenvalues act as effective learning rate multipliers and propose a family of isotropic loss functions (IsoLoss) that equalize convergence rates across eigenmodes. Empirically, IsoLoss speeds up the initial learning dynamics and increases robustness, thereby allowing us to dispense with the EMA target network typically used with non-contrastive methods. Our analysis sheds light on the variance regularization mechanisms of non-contrastive SSL and lays the theoretical grounds for crafting novel loss functions that shape the learning dynamics of the predictor's spectrum.
Manu Srinath Halvagal, Axel Laborieux, Friedemann Zenke
NeurIPS1