EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jay Tenenbaum
dblp:263/1858
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
2as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 2 first-author · 4 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 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.
| Network and information security
2 papers |
Privacy and data protection · 82% Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 18% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Generative modeling · 57% Reinforcement learning · 43% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Visual content generation and editing · 100% |
Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy |
1.2 | 2 | 2023 | Concurrent Shuffle Differential Privacy Under Continual Observation · ICML 2023 Differentially Private Multi-Armed Bandits in the Shuffle Model · NeurIPS 2021 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › distributed differential privacy
shuffle model |
1.2 | 2 | 2023 | Concurrent Shuffle Differential Privacy Under Continual Observation · ICML 2023 Differentially Private Multi-Armed Bandits in the Shuffle Model · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model
cross-attention control |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Prompt-to-Prompt Image Editing with Cross-Attention Control · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Prompt-to-Prompt Image Editing with Cross-Attention Control · ICLR 2023 |
Visual content generation and editing
image editing |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Prompt-to-Prompt Image Editing with Cross-Attention Control · ICLR 2023 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy
continual release |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Concurrent Shuffle Differential Privacy Under Continual Observation · ICML 2023 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › secure aggregation
secure summation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Concurrent Shuffle Differential Privacy Under Continual Observation · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › multi-armed bandit
differentially private bandits |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Differentially Private Multi-Armed Bandits in the Shuffle Model · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-armed bandit |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Differentially Private Multi-Armed Bandits in the Shuffle Model · NeurIPS 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
diffusion model · 1.3cross-attention · 1.3differential privacy · 1.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Unimodal Strategies in Density-Based Clustering
Oron Nir, Jay Tenenbaum, Ariel Shamir |
ECML/PKDD (1) | 2 |
| 2023 | Prompt-to-Prompt Image Editing with Cross-Attention Control
Amir Hertz, Ron Mokady, Jay Tenenbaum, Kfir Aberman, Yael Pritch, Daniel Cohen-Or |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2023 | Concurrent Shuffle Differential Privacy Under Continual ObservationabstractWe introduce the concurrent shuffle model of differential privacy. In this model we have multiple concurrent shufflers permuting messages from different, possibly overlapping, batches of users. Similarly to the standard (single) shuffler model, the privacy requirement is that the concatenation of all shuffled messages should be differentially private. We study the private continual summation problem (a.k.a. the counter problem) and show that the concurrent shuffle model allows for significantly improved error compared to a standard (single) shuffler model. Specifically, we give a summation algorithm with error $\tilde{O}(n^{1/(2k+1)})$ with $k$ concurrent shufflers on a sequence of length $n$. Furthermore, we prove that this bound is tight for any $k$, even if the algorithm can choose the sizes of the batches adaptively. For $k=\log n$ shufflers, the resulting error is polylogarithmic, much better than $\tilde{\Theta}(n^{1/3})$ which we show is the smallest possible with a single shuffler. We use our online summation algorithm to get algorithms with improved regret bounds for the contextual linear bandit problem. In particular we get optimal $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{n})$ regret with $k= \tilde{\Omega}(\log n)$ concurrent shufflers. Jay Tenenbaum, Haim Kaplan, Yishay Mansour, Uri Stemmer |
ICML | 1 |
| 2021 | Differentially Private Multi-Armed Bandits in the Shuffle ModelabstractWe give an $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-differentially private algorithm for the Multi-Armed Bandit (MAB) problem in the shuffle model with a distribution-dependent regret of $O\left(\left(\sum_{a:\Delta_a>0}\frac{\log T}{\Delta_a}\right)+\frac{k\sqrt{\log\frac{1}{\delta}}\log T}{\varepsilon}\right)$, and a distribution-independent regret of $O\left(\sqrt{kT\log T}+\frac{k\sqrt{\log\frac{1}{\delta}}\log T}{\varepsilon}\right)$, where $T$ is the number of rounds, $\Delta_a$ is the suboptimality gap of the action $a$, and $k$ is the total number of actions. Our upper bound almost matches the regret of the best known algorithms for the centralized model, and significantly outperforms the best known algorithm in the local model. Jay Tenenbaum, Haim Kaplan, Yishay Mansour, Uri Stemmer |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2021 | Locality Sensitive Hashing for Efficient Similar Polygon RetrievalabstractLocality Sensitive Hashing (LSH) is an effective method of indexing a set of items to support efficient nearest neighbors queries in high-dimensional spaces. The basic idea of LSH is that similar items should produce hash collisions with higher probability than dissimilar items. We study LSH for (not necessarily convex) polygons, and use it to give efficient data structures for similar shape retrieval. Arkin et al. [Arkin et al., 1991] represent polygons by their "turning function" - a function which follows the angle between the polygon’s tangent and the x-axis while traversing the perimeter of the polygon. They define the distance between polygons to be variations of the L_p (for p = 1,2) distance between their turning functions. This metric is invariant under translation, rotation and scaling (and the selection of the initial point on the perimeter) and therefore models well the intuitive notion of shape resemblance. We develop and analyze LSH near neighbor data structures for several variations of the L_p distance for functions (for p = 1,2). By applying our schemes to the turning functions of a collection of polygons we obtain efficient near neighbor LSH-based structures for polygons. To tune our structures to turning functions of polygons, we prove some new properties of these turning functions that may be of independent interest. As part of our analysis, we address the following problem which is of independent interest. Find the vertical translation of a function f that is closest in L₁ distance to a function g. We prove tight bounds on the approximation guarantee obtained by the translation which is equal to the difference between the averages of g and f. Haim Kaplan, Jay Tenenbaum |
STACS | 2 |