Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Alexander Kolesov
dblp:287/4380
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
3as first author
8since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 8 · 3 first-author · 8 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 |
Generative modeling · 49% Optimization for machine learning · 44% Language models and text generation · 5% | |
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 14 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
optimal transport |
3.4 | 5 | 2024 | Energy-Guided Continuous Entropic Barycenter Estimation for General Costs · NeurIPS 2024 Energy-guided Entropic Neural Optimal Transport · ICLR 2024 Building the Bridge of Schrödinger: A Continuous Entropic Optimal Transport Benchmark · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › optimal transport
entropic optimal transport |
2.1 | 3 | 2024 | Energy-guided Entropic Neural Optimal Transport · ICLR 2024 Building the Bridge of Schrödinger: A Continuous Entropic Optimal Transport Benchmark · NeurIPS 2023 Entropic Neural Optimal Transport via Diffusion Processes · NeurIPS 2023 |
Mathematical optimization
optimal transport |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Robust Barycenter Estimation using Semi-Unbalanced Neural Optimal Transport · ICLR 2025 Estimating Barycenters of Distributions with Neural Optimal Transport · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
energy-based model |
1.5 | 2 | 2024 | Energy-Guided Continuous Entropic Barycenter Estimation for General Costs · NeurIPS 2024 Energy-guided Entropic Neural Optimal Transport · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model |
1.3 | 2 | 2023 | Building the Bridge of Schrödinger: A Continuous Entropic Optimal Transport Benchmark · NeurIPS 2023 Entropic Neural Optimal Transport via Diffusion Processes · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model
schrödinger bridge |
1.3 | 2 | 2023 | Building the Bridge of Schrödinger: A Continuous Entropic Optimal Transport Benchmark · NeurIPS 2023 Entropic Neural Optimal Transport via Diffusion Processes · NeurIPS 2023 |
Mathematical optimization › optimal transport
unbalanced optimal transport |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Robust Barycenter Estimation using Semi-Unbalanced Neural Optimal Transport · ICLR 2025 |
Mathematical optimization › optimal transport
wasserstein barycenter |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Estimating Barycenters of Distributions with Neural Optimal Transport · ICML 2024 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › evaluation of language models
benchmark construction |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Building the Bridge of Schrödinger: A Continuous Entropic Optimal Transport Benchmark · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
generative adversarial network |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Kantorovich Strikes Back! Wasserstein GANs are not Optimal Transport? · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › generative adversarial network
Wasserstein GAN |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Kantorovich Strikes Back! Wasserstein GANs are not Optimal Transport? · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness › adversarial robustness
adversarial training |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Estimating Barycenters of Distributions with Neural Optimal Transport · ICML 2024 |
Visual content generation and editing
image-to-image translation |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Energy-guided Entropic Neural Optimal Transport · ICLR 2024 |
Visual content generation and editing › image-to-image translation
unpaired image translation |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Energy-guided Entropic Neural Optimal Transport · ICLR 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
neural optimal transport · 2.4energy-based model · 1.5dual formulation · 1.5adversarial learning · 1.5StyleGAN · 1.5semi-unbalanced optimal transport · 0.9neural network approximation · 0.9min-max optimization · 0.9electrostatic field simulation · 0.9weak optimal transport · 0.8dual reformulation · 0.8neural network · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Robust Barycenter Estimation using Semi-Unbalanced Neural Optimal TransportabstractAggregating data from multiple sources can be formalized as an *Optimal Transport* (OT) barycenter problem, which seeks to compute the average of probability distributions with respect to OT discrepancies. However, in real-world scenarios, the presence of outliers and noise in the data measures can significantly hinder the performance of traditional statistical methods for estimating OT barycenters. To address this issue, we propose a novel scalable approach for estimating the *robust* continuous barycenter, leveraging the dual formulation of the *(semi-)unbalanced* OT problem. To the best of our knowledge, this paper is the first attempt to develop an algorithm for robust barycenters under the continuous distribution setup. Our method is framed as a $\min$-$\max$ optimization problem and is adaptable to *general* cost functions. We rigorously establish the theoretical underpinnings of the proposed method and demonstrate its robustness to outliers and class imbalance through a number of illustrative experiments. Our source code is publicly available at https://github.com/milenagazdieva/U-NOTBarycenters. Milena Gazdieva, Jaemoo Choi, Alexander Kolesov, Jaewoong Choi, Petr Mokrov, Alexander Korotin |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2025 | Field Matching: an Electrostatic Paradigm to Generate and Transfer DataabstractWe propose Electrostatic Field Matching (EFM), a novel method that is suitable for both generative modelling and distribution transfer tasks. Our approach is inspired by the physics of an electrical capacitor. We place source and target distributions on the capacitor plates and assign them positive and negative charges, respectively. We then learn the capacitor's electrostatic field using a neural network approximator. To map the distributions to each other, we start at one plate of the capacitor and move the samples along the learned electrostatic field lines until they reach the other plate. We theoretically justify that this approach provably yields the distribution transfer. In practice, we demonstrate the performance of our EFM in toy and image data experiments. Alexander Kolesov, S. I. Manukhov, Vladimir V. Palyulin, Alexander Korotin |
ICML | 1 |
| 2024 | Energy-guided Entropic Neural Optimal TransportabstractEnergy-based models (EBMs) are known in the Machine Learning community for decades. Since the seminal works devoted to EBMs dating back to the noughties, there have been a lot of efficient methods which solve the generative modelling problem by means of energy potentials (unnormalized likelihood functions). In contrast, the realm of Optimal Transport (OT) and, in particular, neural OT solvers is much less explored and limited by few recent works (excluding WGAN-based approaches which utilize OT as a loss function and do not model OT maps themselves). In our work, we bridge the gap between EBMs and Entropy-regularized OT. We present a novel methodology which allows utilizing the recent developments and technical improvements of the former in order to enrich the latter. From the theoretical perspective, we prove generalization bounds for our technique. In practice, we validate its applicability in toy 2D and image domains. To showcase the scalability, we empower our method with a pre-trained StyleGAN and apply it to high-res AFHQ $512\times512$ unpaired I2I translation. For simplicity, we choose simple short- and long-run EBMs as a backbone of our Energy-guided Entropic OT approach, leaving the application of more sophisticated EBMs for future research. Our code is available at: https://github.com/PetrMokrov/Energy-guided-Entropic-OT Petr Mokrov, Alexander Korotin, Alexander Kolesov, Nikita Gushchin, Evgeny Burnaev |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2024 | Estimating Barycenters of Distributions with Neural Optimal TransportabstractGiven a collection of probability measures, a practitioner sometimes needs to find an "average" distribution which adequately aggregates reference distributions. A theoretically appealing notion of such an average is the Wasserstein barycenter, which is the primal focus of our work. By building upon the dual formulation of Optimal Transport (OT), we propose a new scalable approach for solving the Wasserstein barycenter problem. Our methodology is based on the recent Neural OT solver: it has bi-level adversarial learning objective and works for general cost functions. These are key advantages of our method since the typical adversarial algorithms leveraging barycenter tasks utilize tri-level optimization and focus mostly on quadratic cost. We also establish theoretical error bounds for our proposed approach and showcase its applicability and effectiveness in illustrative scenarios and image data setups. Our source code is available at https://github.com/justkolesov/NOTBarycenters. Alexander Kolesov, Petr Mokrov, Igor Udovichenko, Milena Gazdieva, Gudmund Pammer, Evgeny Burnaev, Alexander Korotin |
ICML | 1 |
| 2024 | Energy-Guided Continuous Entropic Barycenter Estimation for General CostsabstractOptimal transport (OT) barycenters are a mathematically grounded way of averaging probability distributions while capturing their geometric properties. In short, the barycenter task is to take the average of a collection of probability distributions w.r.t. given OT discrepancies. We propose a novel algorithm for approximating the continuous Entropic OT (EOT) barycenter for arbitrary OT cost functions. Our approach is built upon the dual reformulation of the EOT problem based on weak OT, which has recently gained the attention of the ML community. Beyond its novelty, our method enjoys several advantageous properties: (i) we establish quality bounds for the recovered solution; (ii) this approach seamlessly interconnects with the Energy-Based Models (EBMs) learning procedure enabling the use of well-tuned algorithms for the problem of interest; (iii) it provides an intuitive optimization scheme avoiding min-max, reinforce and other intricate technical tricks. For validation, we consider several low-dimensional scenarios and image-space setups, including *non-Euclidean* cost functions. Furthermore, we investigate the practical task of learning the barycenter on an image manifold generated by a pretrained generative model, opening up new directions for real-world applications. Our code is available at https://github.com/justkolesov/EnergyGuidedBarycenters. Alexander Kolesov, Petr Mokrov, Igor Udovichenko, Milena Gazdieva, Gudmund Pammer, Anastasis Kratsios, Evgeny Burnaev, Alexander Korotin |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2023 | Entropic Neural Optimal Transport via Diffusion ProcessesabstractWe propose a novel neural algorithm for the fundamental problem of computing the entropic optimal transport (EOT) plan between probability distributions which are accessible by samples. Our algorithm is based on the saddle point reformulation of the dynamic version of EOT which is known as the Schrödinger Bridge problem. In contrast to the prior methods for large-scale EOT, our algorithm is end-to-end and consists of a single learning step, has fast inference procedure, and allows handling small values of the entropy regularization coefficient which is of particular importance in some applied problems. Empirically, we show the performance of the method on several large-scale EOT tasks. The code for the ENOT solver can be found at https://github.com/ngushchin/EntropicNeuralOptimalTransport Nikita Gushchin, Alexander Kolesov, Alexander Korotin, Dmitry P. Vetrov, Evgeny Burnaev |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2023 | Building the Bridge of Schrödinger: A Continuous Entropic Optimal Transport BenchmarkabstractOver the last several years, there has been significant progress in developing neural solvers for the Schrödinger Bridge (SB) problem and applying them to generative modelling. This new research field is justifiably fruitful as it is interconnected with the practically well-performing diffusion models and theoretically grounded entropic optimal transport (EOT). Still, the area lacks non-trivial tests allowing a researcher to understand how well the methods solve SB or its equivalent continuous EOT problem. We fill this gap and propose a novel way to create pairs of probability distributions for which the ground truth OT solution is known by the construction. Our methodology is generic and works for a wide range of OT formulations, in particular, it covers the EOT which is equivalent to SB (the main interest of our study). This development allows us to create continuous benchmark distributions with the known EOT and SB solutions on high-dimensional spaces such as spaces of images. As an illustration, we use these benchmark pairs to test how well existing neural EOT/SB solvers actually compute the EOT solution. Our code for constructing benchmark pairs under different setups is available at: https://github.com/ngushchin/EntropicOTBenchmark Nikita Gushchin, Alexander Kolesov, Petr Mokrov, Polina Karpikova, Andrei Spiridonov, Evgeny Burnaev, Alexander Korotin |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2022 | Kantorovich Strikes Back! Wasserstein GANs are not Optimal Transport?abstractWasserstein Generative Adversarial Networks (WGANs) are the popular generative models built on the theory of Optimal Transport (OT) and the Kantorovich duality. Despite the success of WGANs, it is still unclear how well the underlying OT dual solvers approximate the OT cost (Wasserstein-1 distance, W1) and the OT gradient needed to update the generator. In this paper, we address these questions. We construct 1-Lipschitz functions and use them to build ray monotone transport plans. This strategy yields pairs of continuous benchmark distributions with the analytically known OT plan, OT cost and OT gradient in high-dimensional spaces such as spaces of images. We thoroughly evaluate popular WGAN dual form solvers (gradient penalty, spectral normalization, entropic regularization, etc.) using these benchmark pairs. Even though these solvers perform well in WGANs, none of them faithfully compute W1 in high dimensions. Nevertheless, many provide a meaningful approximation of the OT gradient. These observations suggest that these solvers should not be treated as good estimators of W1 but to some extent they indeed can be used in variational problems requiring the minimization of W1. Alexander Korotin, Alexander Kolesov, Evgeny Burnaev |
NeurIPS | 2 |