Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Dhananjay Ashok
dblp:277/0892
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-7500-3730ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 first-author · 3 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 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 |
Trustworthy machine learning · 72% Autonomous driving · 18% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 10% | |
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Robotics › Autonomous driving
behavior prediction |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Language Models Can Predict Their Own Behavior · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Language Models Can Predict Their Own Behavior · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › AI safety
jailbreak detection |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Language Models Can Predict Their Own Behavior · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
representation probing |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Language Models Can Predict Their Own Behavior · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Language Models Can Predict Their Own Behavior · NeurIPS 2025 |
Mathematical optimization › discrete optimization
mixed integer linear programming |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | A Solver + Gradient Descent Training Algorithm for Deep Neural Networks · IJCAI 2022 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
symbolic regression |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Logic Guided Genetic Algorithms (Student Abstract) · AAAI 2021 |
Mathematical optimization › evolutionary computation
genetic algorithm |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Logic Guided Genetic Algorithms (Student Abstract) · AAAI 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
gradient descent · 1.1logic-guided data augmentation · 1.0genetic algorithm · 1.0auxiliary truth constraints · 1.0conformal prediction · 0.9chain-of-thought prompting · 0.9mixed-integer linear programming · 0.6mixed integer linear programming · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Language Models Can Predict Their Own BehaviorabstractThe text produced by language models (LMs) can exhibit specific `behaviors,' such as a failure to follow alignment training, that we hope to detect and react to during deployment. Identifying these behaviors can often only be done post facto, i.e., after the entire text of the output has been generated. We provide evidence that there are times when we can predict how an LM will behave early in computation, before even a single token is generated. We show that probes trained on the internal representation of input tokens alone can predict a wide range of eventual behaviors over the entire output sequence. Using methods from conformal prediction, we provide provable bounds on the estimation error of our probes, creating precise early warning systems for these behaviors. The conformal probes can identify instances that will trigger alignment failures (jailbreaking) and instruction-following failures, without requiring a single token to be generated. An early warning system built on the probes reduces jailbreaking by 91%. Our probes also show promise in pre-emptively estimating how confident the model will be in its response, a behavior that cannot be detected using the output text alone. Conformal probes can preemptively estimate the final prediction of an LM that uses Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, hence accelerating inference. When applied to an LM that uses CoT to perform text classification, the probes drastically reduce inference costs (65% on average across 27 datasets), with negligible accuracy loss. Encouragingly, probes generalize to unseen datasets and perform better on larger models, suggesting applicability to the largest of models in real-world settings. Dhananjay Ashok, Jonathan May |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2022 | A Solver + Gradient Descent Training Algorithm for Deep Neural NetworksabstractWe present a novel hybrid algorithm for training Deep Neural Networks that combines the state-of-the-art Gradient Descent (GD) method with a Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) solver, outperforming GD and variants in terms of accuracy, as well as resource and data efficiency for both regression and classification tasks. Our GD+Solver hybrid algorithm, called GDSolver, works as follows: given a DNN D as input, GDSolver invokes GD to partially train D until it gets stuck in a local minima, at which point GDSolver invokes an MILP solver to exhaustively search a region of the loss landscape around the weight assignments of D’s final layer parameters with the goal of tunnelling through and escaping the local minima. The process is repeated until desired accuracy is achieved. In our experiments, we find that GDSolver not only scales well to additional data and very large model sizes, but also outperforms all other competing methods in terms of rates of convergence and data efficiency. For regression tasks, GDSolver produced models that, on average, had 31.5% lower MSE in 48% less time, and for classification tasks on MNIST and CIFAR10, GDSolver was able to achieve the highest accuracy over all competing methods, using only 50% of the training data that GD baselines required. Dhananjay Ashok, Vineel Nagisetty, Christopher Srinivasa, Vijay Ganesh 0001 |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 2021 | Logic Guided Genetic Algorithms (Student Abstract)abstractWe present a novel Auxiliary Truth enhanced Genetic Algorithm (GA) that uses logical or mathematical constraints as a means of data augmentation as well as to compute loss (in conjunction with the traditional MSE), with the aim of increasing both data efficiency and accuracy of symbolic regression (SR) algorithms. Our method, logic-guided genetic algorithm (LGGA), takes as input a set of labelled data points and auxiliary truths (AT) (mathematical facts known a priori about the unknown function the regressor aims to learn) and outputs a specially generated and curated dataset that can be used with any SR method. We evaluate LGGA against state-of-the-art SR tools, namely, Eureqa and TuringBot and find that using these SR tools in conjunction with LGGA results in them solving up to 30% more equations, needing only a fraction of the amount of data compared to the same tool without LGGA, i.e., resulting in up to a 61.9% improvement in data efficiency. Dhananjay Ashok, Joseph Scott, Sebastian Johann Wetzel, Maysum Panju 0001, Vijay Ganesh 0001 |
AAAI | 1 |