EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Margalit Glasgow
dblp:268/0063 · also Margalit R. Glasgow
· DBLP profile ↗
10ranked-venue papers
6as first author
10since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 9 · 5 first-author · 9 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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
7 papers |
Optimization for machine learning · 29% Learning theory · 24% Deep learning architectures and training · 20% |
Topics — the 19 heaviest of 21, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
distributed optimization |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Convergence of Distributed Adaptive Optimization with Local Updates · ICLR 2025 The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › distributed training › communication-efficient distributed SGD
local SGD |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Convergence of Distributed Adaptive Optimization with Local Updates · ICLR 2025 The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
sample complexity |
1.4 | 2 | 2024 | SGD Finds then Tunes Features in Two-Layer Neural Networks with near-Optimal Sample Complexity: A Case Study in the XOR problem · ICLR 2024 Beyond NTK with Vanilla Gradient Descent: A Mean-Field Analysis of Neural Networks with Polynomial Width, Samples, and Time · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › distributed training
communication-efficient training |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Convergence of Distributed Adaptive Optimization with Local Updates · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical learning theory › statistical physics of learning
mean-field analysis |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Mean-field analysis of polynomial-width two-layer neural network beyond finite time horizon · COLT 2025 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference
mean-field approximation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Mean-field analysis of polynomial-width two-layer neural network beyond finite time horizon · COLT 2025 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training dynamics |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Mean-field analysis of polynomial-width two-layer neural network beyond finite time horizon · COLT 2025 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › stochastic gradient descent
minibatch SGD |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › training optimization
stochastic gradient descent dynamics |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | SGD Finds then Tunes Features in Two-Layer Neural Networks with near-Optimal Sample Complexity: A Case Study in the XOR problem · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
contrastive learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Feature Dropout: Revisiting the Role of Augmentations in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
data augmentation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Feature Dropout: Revisiting the Role of Augmentations in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
foundation model |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Feature Dropout: Revisiting the Role of Augmentations in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Max-Margin Works while Large Margin Fails: Generalization without Uniform Convergence · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization
margin-based generalization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Max-Margin Works while Large Margin Fails: Generalization without Uniform Convergence · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
non-convex optimization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Beyond NTK with Vanilla Gradient Descent: A Mean-Field Analysis of Neural Networks with Polynomial Width, Samples, and Time · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
adaptive optimization |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Convergence of Distributed Adaptive Optimization with Local Updates · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › gradient-based optimization › gradient descent
projected gradient descent |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Mean-field analysis of polynomial-width two-layer neural network beyond finite time horizon · COLT 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Feature Dropout: Revisiting the Role of Augmentations in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
mean-field analysis · 1.5projected gradient descent · 0.9ordinary differential equation · 0.9momentum · 0.9local SGD · 0.9gradient clipping · 0.9generalized smoothness · 0.9adam · 0.9lower bound analysis · 0.8data heterogeneity modeling · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Mean-field analysis of polynomial-width two-layer neural network beyond finite time horizonabstractWe study the approximation gap between the dynamics of a polynomial-width neural network and its infinite-width counterpart, both trained using projected gradient descent in the mean-field scaling regime. We demonstrate how to tightly bound this approximation gap through a differential equation governed by the mean-field dynamics. A key factor influencing the growth of this ODE is the local Hessian of each particle, defined as the derivative of the particle’s velocity in the mean- field dynamics with respect to its position. We apply our results to the canonical feature learning problem of estimating a well-specified single-index model; we permit the information exponent to be arbitrarily large, leading to convergence times that grow polynomially in the ambient dimension d. We show that, due to a certain "self-concordance" property in these problems - where the local Hessian of a particle is bounded by a constant times the particle’s velocity - polynomially many neurons are sufficient to closely approximate the mean-field dynamics throughout training. Margalit Glasgow, Denny Wu, Joan Bruna |
COLT | 1 |
| 2025 | Convergence of Distributed Adaptive Optimization with Local UpdatesabstractWe study distributed adaptive algorithms with local updates (intermittent communication). Despite the great empirical success of adaptive methods in distributed training of modern machine learning models, the theoretical benefits of local updates within adaptive methods, particularly in terms of reducing communication complexity, have not been fully understood yet. In this paper, for the first time, we prove that \em Local SGD \em with momentum (\em Local \em SGDM) and \em Local \em Adam can outperform their minibatch counterparts in convex and weakly convex settings in certain regimes, respectively. Our analysis relies on a novel technique to prove contraction during local iterations, which is a crucial yet challenging step to show the advantages of local updates, under generalized smoothness assumption and gradient clipping strategy. Margalit Glasgow |
ICLR | 2 |
| 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 | 2 |
| 2024 | SGD Finds then Tunes Features in Two-Layer Neural Networks with near-Optimal Sample Complexity: A Case Study in the XOR problemabstractIn this work, we consider the optimization process of minibatch stochastic gradient descent (SGD) on a 2-layer neural network with data separated by a quadratic ground truth function. We prove that with data drawn from the Boolean hypercube labeled by the quadratic ``XOR'' function $y = -x_ix_j$ , it is possible to train to a population error $o(1)$
with $\Theta(d\text{polylog}(d))$ samples. Our result considers simultaneously training both layers of the two-layer-neural network with ReLU activations via standard minibatch SGD on the logistic loss. To our knowledge, this work is the first to give a sample complexity of
for efficiently learning the XOR function on isotropic data on a standard neural network with standard training. Our main technique is showing that the network evolves in two phases: a \em signal-finding \em phase where the network is small and many of the neurons evolve independently to find features, and a \em signal-heavy \em phase, where SGD maintains and balances the features. We leverage the simultaneous training of the layers to show that it is sufficient for only a small fraction of the neurons to learn features, since those neurons will be amplified by the simultaneous growth of their second layer weights. Margalit Glasgow |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2023 | Max-Margin Works while Large Margin Fails: Generalization without Uniform Convergence
Margalit Glasgow, Colin Wei, Mary Wootters, Tengyu Ma 0001 |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2023 | Beyond NTK with Vanilla Gradient Descent: A Mean-Field Analysis of Neural Networks with Polynomial Width, Samples, and TimeabstractDespite recent theoretical progress on the non-convex optimization of two-layer neural networks, it is still an open question whether gradient descent on neural networks without unnatural modifications can achieve better sample complexity than kernel methods. This paper provides a clean mean-field analysis of projected gradient flow on polynomial-width two-layer neural networks. Different from prior works, our analysis does not require unnatural modifications of the optimization algorithm. We prove that with sample size $n = O(d^{3.1})$ where $d$ is the dimension of the inputs, the network trained with projected gradient flow converges in polynomial time to a non-trivial error that is not achievable by kernel methods using $n \ll d^4$ samples, hence demonstrating a clear separation between unmodified gradient descent and NTK. As a corollary, we show that projected gradient descent with a positive learning rate and a polynomial number of iterations converges to low error with the same sample complexity. Arvind V. Mahankali, Kefan Dong, Margalit Glasgow, Tengyu Ma 0001 |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2023 | Feature Dropout: Revisiting the Role of Augmentations in Contrastive LearningabstractWhat role do augmentations play in contrastive learning? Recent work suggests that good augmentations are label-preserving with respect to a specific downstream task. We complicate this picture by showing that label-destroying augmentations can be useful in the foundation model setting, where the goal is to learn diverse, general-purpose representations for multiple downstream tasks. We perform contrastive learning experiments on a range of image and audio datasets with multiple downstream tasks (e.g. for digits superimposed on photographs, predicting the class of one vs. the other). We find that Viewmaker Networks, a recently proposed model for learning augmentations for contrastive learning, produce label-destroying augmentations that stochastically destroy features needed for different downstream tasks. These augmentations are interpretable (e.g. altering shapes, digits, or letters added to images) and surprisingly often result in better performance compared to expert-designed augmentations, despite not preserving label information. To support our empirical results, we theoretically analyze a simple contrastive learning setting with a linear model. In this setting, label-destroying augmentations are crucial for preventing one set of features from suppressing the learning of features useful for another downstream task. Our results highlight the need for analyzing the interaction between multiple downstream tasks when trying to explain the success of foundation models. Alex Tamkin, Margalit Glasgow, Xiluo He, Noah D. Goodman |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2022 | Asynchronous Distributed Optimization with Stochastic DelaysabstractWe study asynchronous finite sum minimization in a distributed-data setting with a central parameter server. While asynchrony is well understood in parallel settings where the data is accessible by all machines—e.g., modifications of variance-reduced gradient algorithms like SAGA work well—little is known for the distributed-data setting. We develop an algorithm ADSAGA based on SAGA for the distributed-data setting, in which the data is partitioned between many machines. We show that with $m$ machines, under a natural stochastic delay model with an mean delay of $m$, ADSAGA converges in $\tilde{O}\left(\left(n + \sqrt{m}\kappa\right)\log(1/\epsilon)\right)$ iterations, where $n$ is the number of component functions, and $\kappa$ is a condition number. This complexity sits squarely between the complexity $\tilde{O}\left(\left(n + \kappa\right)\log(1/\epsilon)\right)$ of SAGA without delays and the complexity $\tilde{O}\left(\left(n + m\kappa\right)\log(1/\epsilon)\right)$ of parallel asynchronous algorithms where the delays are arbitrary (but bounded by $O(m)$), and the data is accessible by all. Existing asynchronous algorithms with distributed-data setting and arbitrary delays have only been shown to converge in $\tilde{O}(n^2\kappa\log(1/\epsilon))$ iterations. We empirically compare on least-squares problems the iteration complexity and wallclock performance of ADSAGA to existing parallel and distributed algorithms, including synchronous minibatch algorithms. Our results demonstrate the wallclock advantage of variance-reduced asynchronous approaches over SGD or synchronous approaches. Margalit Glasgow, Mary Wootters |
AISTATS | 1 |
| 2022 | Sharp Bounds for Federated Averaging (Local SGD) and Continuous PerspectiveabstractFederated Averaging (FedAvg), also known as Local SGD, is one of the most popular algorithms in Federated Learning (FL). Despite its simplicity and popularity, the convergence rate of FedAvg has thus far been undetermined. Even under the simplest assumptions (convex, smooth, homogeneous, and bounded covariance), the best-known upper and lower bounds do not match, and it is not clear whether the existing analysis captures the capacity of the algorithm. In this work, we first resolve this question by providing a lower bound for FedAvg that matches the existing upper bound, which shows the existing FedAvg upper bound analysis is not improvable. Additionally, we establish a lower bound in a heterogeneous setting that nearly matches the existing upper bound. While our lower bounds show the limitations of FedAvg, under an additional assumption of third-order smoothness, we prove more optimistic state-of-the-art convergence results in both convex and non-convex settings. Our analysis stems from a notion we call iterate bias, which is defined by the deviation of the expectation of the SGD trajectory from the noiseless gradient descent trajectory with the same initialization. We prove novel sharp bounds on this quantity, and show intuitively how to analyze this quantity from a Stochastic Differential Equation (SDE) perspective. Margalit Glasgow, Tengyu Ma 0001 |
AISTATS | 1 |
| 2021 | Approximate Gradient Coding with Optimal DecodingabstractIn distributed optimization problems, a technique called gradient coding, which involves replicating data points, has been used to mitigate the effect of straggling machines. Recent work has studied approximate gradient coding, which concerns coding schemes where the replication factor of the data is too low to recover the full gradient exactly. Our work is motivated by the challenge of creating approximate gradient coding schemes that simultaneously work well in both the adversarial and stochastic models. To that end, we introduce novel approximate gradient codes based on expander graphs, in which each machine receives exactly two blocks of data points. We analyze the decoding error both in the random and adversarial straggler setting, when optimal decoding coefficients are used. We show that in the random setting, our schemes achieve an error to the gradient that decays exponentially in the replication factor. In the adversarial setting, the error is nearly a factor of two smaller than any existing code with similar performance in the random setting. We show convergence bounds both in the random and adversarial setting for gradient descent under standard assumptions using our codes. In the random setting, our convergence rate improves upon block-box bounds. In the adversarial setting, we show that gradient descent can converge down to a noise floor that scales linearly with the adversarial error to the gradient. We demonstrate empirically that our schemes achieve near-optimal error in the random setting and converge faster than algorithms which do not use the optimal decoding coefficients. Margalit Glasgow, Mary Wootters |
ISIT | 1 |