Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Nikhil Kak
dblp:295/9108
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Machine learning and data management · 100% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Cloud and datacenter computing · 50% Parallel and multicore computing · 50% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning and data management
in-database machine learning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Distributed Deep Learning on Data Systems: A Comparative Analysis of Approaches · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2021 |
Cloud and datacenter computing
cluster resource management and scheduling |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Distributed Deep Learning on Data Systems: A Comparative Analysis of Approaches · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2021 |
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel computation models
parallel execution models |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Distributed Deep Learning on Data Systems: A Comparative Analysis of Approaches · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
model hopper parallelism · 1.0empirical benchmarking · 1.0analytical comparison · 1.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Distributed Deep Learning on Data Systems: A Comparative Analysis of ApproachesabstractDeep learning (DL) is growing in popularity for many data analytics applications, including among enterprises. Large business-critical datasets in such settings typically reside in RDBMSs or other data systems. The DB community has long aimed to bring machine learning (ML) to DBMS-resident data. Given past lessons from in-DBMS ML and recent advances in scalable DL systems, DBMS and cloud vendors are increasingly interested in adding more DL support for DB-resident data. Recently, a new parallel DL model selection execution approach called Model Hopper Parallelism (MOP) was proposed. In this paper, we characterize the particular suitability of MOP for DL on data systems, but to bring MOP-based DL to DB-resident data, we show that there is no single "best" approach, and an interesting tradeoff space of approaches exists. We explain four canonical approaches and build prototypes upon Greenplum Database, compare them analytically on multiple criteria (e.g., runtime efficiency and ease of governance) and compare them empirically with large-scale DL workloads. Our experiments and analyses show that it is non-trivial to meet all practical desiderata well and there is a Pareto frontier; for instance, some approaches are 3x-6x faster but fare worse on governance and portability. Our results and insights can help DBMS and cloud vendors design better DL support for DB users. All of our source code, data, and other artifacts are available at https://github.com/makemebitter/cerebro-ds. Frank Mcquillan, Nandish Jayaram, Nikhil Kak, Ekta Khanna, Orhan Kislal, Domino Valdano, Arun Kumar 0001 |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 4 |