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

Alexandru Cioba

dblp:288/0091 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
4since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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
3 papers
Optimization for machine learning · 34% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 23% Learning theory · 20%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Electronic design automation · 100%
Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Mathematical optimization · 100%

Topics — the 16 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › model-based optimization
bayesian optimization
0.812024
Sample-efficient Bayesian Optimisation Using Known Invariances · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
gaussian process
0.812024
Sample-efficient Bayesian Optimisation Using Known Invariances · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › second-order optimization
gauss-newton method
0.812024
Exact, Tractable Gauss-Newton Optimization in Deep Reversible Architectures Reveal Poor Generalization · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization
0.812024
Exact, Tractable Gauss-Newton Optimization in Deep Reversible Architectures Reveal Poor Generalization · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process › kernel design
invariant kernel
0.812024
Sample-efficient Bayesian Optimisation Using Known Invariances · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
second-order optimization
0.812024
Exact, Tractable Gauss-Newton Optimization in Deep Reversible Architectures Reveal Poor Generalization · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training dynamics
0.812024
Exact, Tractable Gauss-Newton Optimization in Deep Reversible Architectures Reveal Poor Generalization · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
meta-learning
0.612022
How to Distribute Data across Tasks for Meta-Learning? · AAAI 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory
sample complexity
0.612022
How to Distribute Data across Tasks for Meta-Learning? · AAAI 2022
Electronic design automation › physical design › placement
circuit placement
0.612022
Flexible chip placement via reinforcement learning: late breaking results · DAC 2022
Electronic design automation › physical design › placement › module placement
macro placement
0.612022
Flexible chip placement via reinforcement learning: late breaking results · DAC 2022
Electronic design automation
physical design
0.612022
Flexible chip placement via reinforcement learning: late breaking results · DAC 2022
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › feedforward neural network
invertible neural network
0.212024
Exact, Tractable Gauss-Newton Optimization in Deep Reversible Architectures Reveal Poor Generalization · NeurIPS 2024
Mathematical optimization
global optimization
0.212024
Sample-efficient Bayesian Optimisation Using Known Invariances · NeurIPS 2024
Mathematical optimization
multi-objective optimization
0.212022
Flexible chip placement via reinforcement learning: late breaking results · DAC 2022
Mathematical optimization › multi-objective optimization
pareto front
0.212022
Flexible chip placement via reinforcement learning: late breaking results · DAC 2022

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

gaussian process · 1.5bayesian optimization · 1.5reinforcement learning · 1.1multi-objective reinforcement learning · 1.1neural tangent kernel · 0.8gauss-newton · 0.8mixed linear regression · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Sample-efficient Bayesian Optimisation Using Known Invariances
abstract
Bayesian optimisation (BO) is a powerful framework for global optimisation of costly functions, using predictions from Gaussian process models (GPs). In this work, we apply BO to functions that exhibit invariance to a known group of transformations. We show that vanilla and constrained BO algorithms are inefficient when optimising such invariant objectives, and provide a method for incorporating group invariances into the kernel of the GP to produce invariance-aware algorithms that achieve significant improvements in sample efficiency. We derive a bound on the maximum information gain of these invariant kernels, and provide novel upper and lower bounds on the number of observations required for invariance-aware BO algorithms to achieve $\epsilon$-optimality. We demonstrate our method's improved performance on a range of synthetic invariant and quasi-invariant functions. We also apply our method in the case where only some of the invariance is incorporated into the kernel, and find that these kernels achieve similar gains in sample efficiency at significantly reduced computational cost. Finally, we use invariant BO to design a current drive system for a nuclear fusion reactor, finding a high-performance solution where non-invariant methods failed.
Theodore Brown, Alexandru Cioba, Ilija Bogunovic
NeurIPS2
2024 Exact, Tractable Gauss-Newton Optimization in Deep Reversible Architectures Reveal Poor Generalization
abstract
Second-order optimization has been shown to accelerate the training of deep neural networks in many applications, often yielding faster progress per iteration on the training loss compared to first-order optimizers. However, the generalization properties of second-order methods are still being debated. Theoretical investigations have proved difficult to carry out outside the tractable settings of heavily simplified model classes - thus, the relevance of existing theories to practical deep learning applications remains unclear. Similarly, empirical studies in large-scale models and real datasets are significantly confounded by the necessity to approximate second-order updates in practice. It is often unclear whether the observed generalization behaviour arises specifically from the second-order nature of the parameter updates, or instead reflects the specific structured (e.g. Kronecker) approximations used or any damping-based interpolation towards first-order updates. Here, we show for the first time that exact Gauss-Newton (GN) updates take on a tractable form in a class of deep reversible architectures that are sufficiently expressive to be meaningfully applied to common benchmark datasets. We exploit this novel setting to study the training and generalization properties of the GN optimizer. We find that exact GN generalizes poorly. In the mini-batch training setting, this manifests as rapidly saturating progress even on the training loss, with parameter updates found to overfit each mini-batch without producing the features that would support generalization to other mini-batches. In contrast to previous work, we show that our experiments run in the feature learning regime, in which the neural tangent kernel (NTK) changes during the course of training. However, changes in the NTK are not associated with any significant change in neural representations, explaining the lack of generalization.
Davide Buffelli, Jamie McGowan, Wangkun Xu, Alexandru Cioba, Da-Shan Shiu, Guillaume Hennequin, Alberto Bernacchia
NeurIPS4
2022 How to Distribute Data across Tasks for Meta-Learning?
abstract
Meta-learning models transfer the knowledge acquired from previous tasks to quickly learn new ones. They are trained on benchmarks with a fixed number of data points per task. This number is usually arbitrary and it is unknown how it affects performance at testing. Since labelling of data is expensive, finding the optimal allocation of labels across training tasks may reduce costs. Given a fixed budget of labels, should we use a small number of highly labelled tasks, or many tasks with few labels each? Should we allocate more labels to some tasks and less to others? We show that: 1) If tasks are homogeneous, there is a uniform optimal allocation, whereby all tasks get the same amount of data; 2) At fixed budget, there is a trade-off between number of tasks and number of data points per task, with a unique solution for the optimum; 3) When trained separately, harder task should get more data, at the cost of a smaller number of tasks; 4) When training on a mixture of easy and hard tasks, more data should be allocated to easy tasks. Interestingly, Neuroscience experiments have shown that human visual skills also transfer better from easy tasks. We prove these results mathematically on mixed linear regression, and we show empirically that the same results hold for few-shot image classification on CIFAR-FS and mini-ImageNet. Our results provide guidance for allocating labels across tasks when collecting data for meta-learning.
Alexandru Cioba, Michael Bromberg, Ritwik Niyogi, Georgios Batzolis, Jezabel R. Garcia, Da-Shan Shiu, Alberto Bernacchia
AAAI1
2022 Flexible chip placement via reinforcement learning: late breaking results
abstract
Recently, successful applications of reinforcement learning to chip placement have emerged. Pretrained models are necessary to improve efficiency and effectiveness. Currently, the weights of objective metrics (e.g., wirelength, congestion, and timing) are fixed during pretraining. However, fixed-weighed models cannot generate the diversity of placements required for engineers to accommodate changing requirements as they arise. This paper proposes flexible multiple-objective reinforcement learning (MORL) to support objective functions with inference-time variable weights using just a single pretrained model. Our macro placement results show that MORL can generate the Pareto frontier of multiple objectives effectively.
Fu-Chieh Chang 0001, Yu-Wei Tseng, Ya-Wen Yu, Ssu-Rui Lee, Alexandru Cioba, I-Lun Tseng, Da-Shan Shiu, Jhih-Wei Hsu, Cheng-Yuan Wang, Chien-Yi Yang, Ren-Chu Wang, Yao-Wen Chang, Tai-Chen Chen, Tung-Chieh Chen
DAC5