Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Eugenia Iofinova
dblp:295/9539
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
2as first author
5since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 2 first-author · 5 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
5 papers |
Efficient and distributed learning · 68% Trustworthy machine learning · 32% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures · 77% Processor architecture and microarchitecture · 23% |
Topics — the 9 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression |
1.7 | 3 | 2023 | Bias in Pruned Vision Models: In-Depth Analysis and Countermeasures · CVPR 2023 How Well Do Sparse ImageNet Models Transfer? · CVPR 2022 AC/DC: Alternating Compressed/DeCompressed Training of Deep Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
sparse training |
1.2 | 2 | 2023 | SparseProp: Efficient Sparse Backpropagation for Faster Training of Neural Networks at the Edge · ICML 2023 AC/DC: Alternating Compressed/DeCompressed Training of Deep Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | SPADE: Sparsity-Guided Debugging for Deep Neural Networks · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › visual explanation
saliency map |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | SPADE: Sparsity-Guided Debugging for Deep Neural Networks · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Bias in Pruned Vision Models: In-Depth Analysis and Countermeasures · CVPR 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
pruning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Bias in Pruned Vision Models: In-Depth Analysis and Countermeasures · CVPR 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › sparse computation
sparse backpropagation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | SparseProp: Efficient Sparse Backpropagation for Faster Training of Neural Networks at the Edge · ICML 2023 |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures › machine learning accelerator › training accelerator
neural network training accelerator |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | SparseProp: Efficient Sparse Backpropagation for Faster Training of Neural Networks at the Edge · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
sparse neural network |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | AC/DC: Alternating Compressed/DeCompressed Training of Deep Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
vectorized CPU implementation · 1.3sparse backpropagation · 1.3sample-targeted pruning · 0.8uncertainty estimation · 0.7pruning · 0.7second-order pruning · 0.6regularization · 0.6magnitude pruning · 0.6lottery ticket · 0.6alternating compressed/decompressed training · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | SPADE: Sparsity-Guided Debugging for Deep Neural NetworksabstractIt is known that sparsity can improve interpretability for deep neural networks. However, existing methods in the area either require networks that are pre-trained with sparsity constraints, or impose sparsity after the fact, altering the network’s general behavior. In this paper, we demonstrate, for the first time, that sparsity can instead be incorporated into the interpretation process itself, as a sample-specific preprocessing step. Unlike previous work, this approach, which we call SPADE, does not place constraints on the trained model and does not affect its behavior during inference on the sample. Given a trained model and a target sample, SPADE uses sample-targeted pruning to provide a "trace" of the network’s execution on the sample, reducing the network to the most important connections prior to computing an interpretation. We demonstrate that preprocessing with SPADE significantly increases the accuracy of image saliency maps across several interpretability methods. Additionally, SPADE improves the usefulness of neuron visualizations, aiding humans in reasoning about network behavior. Our code is available at https://github.com/IST-DASLab/SPADE. Arshia Soltani Moakhar, Eugenia Iofinova, Elias Frantar, Dan Alistarh |
ICML | 2 |
| 2023 | Bias in Pruned Vision Models: In-Depth Analysis and CountermeasuresabstractPruning—that is, setting a significant subset of the parameters of a neural network to zero—is one of the most popular methods of model compression. Yet, several recent works have raised the issue that pruning may induce or exacerbate bias in the output of the compressed model. Despite existing evidence for this phenomenon, the relationship between neural network pruning and induced bias is not well-understood. In this work, we systematically investigate and characterize this phenomenon in Convolutional Neural Networks for computer vision. First, we show that it is in fact possible to obtain highly-sparse models, e.g. with less than 10% remaining weights, which do not decrease in accuracy nor substantially increase in bias when compared to dense models. At the same time, we also find that, at higher sparsities, pruned models exhibit higher uncertainty in their outputs, as well as increased correlations, which we directly link to increased bias. We propose easy-to-use criteria which, based only on the uncompressed model, establish whether bias will increase with pruning, and identify the samples most susceptible to biased predictions post-compression. Our code can be found at https://github.com/IST-DASLab/pruned-vision-model-bias. Eugenia Iofinova, Alexandra Peste, Dan Alistarh |
CVPR | 1 |
| 2023 | SparseProp: Efficient Sparse Backpropagation for Faster Training of Neural Networks at the EdgeabstractWe provide an efficient implementation of the backpropagation algorithm, specialized to the case where the weights of the neural network being trained are sparse. Our algorithm is general, as it applies to arbitrary (unstructured) sparsity and common layer types (e.g., convolutional or linear). We provide a fast vectorized implementation on commodity CPUs, and show that it can yield speedups in end-to-end runtime experiments, both in transfer learning using already-sparsified networks, and in training sparse networks from scratch. Thus, our results provide the first support for sparse training on commodity hardware. Mahdi Nikdan, Tommaso Pegolotti, Eugenia Iofinova, Eldar Kurtic, Dan Alistarh |
ICML | 3 |
| 2022 | How Well Do Sparse ImageNet Models Transfer?abstractTransfer learning is a classic paradigm by which models pretrained on large “upstream” datasets are adapted to yield good results on “downstream” specialized datasets. Generally, more accurate models on the “upstream” dataset tend to provide better transfer accuracy “downstream”. In this work, we perform an in-depth investigation of this phenomenon in the context of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) trained on the ImageNet dataset, which have been pruned-that is, compressed by sparsifiying their connections. We consider transfer using unstructured pruned models obtained by applying several state-of-the-art pruning methods, including magnitude-based, second-order, regrowth, lottery-ticket, and regularization approaches, in the context of twelve standard transfer tasks. In a nutshell, our study shows that sparse models can match or even outperform the transfer performance of dense models, even at high sparsities, and, while doing so, can lead to significant inference and even training speedups. At the same time, we observe and analyze significant differences in the behaviour of different pruning methods. The code is available at: https://github.com/IST-DASLab/sparse-imagenet-transfer. Eugenia Iofinova, Alexandra Peste, Mark Kurtz, Dan Alistarh |
CVPR | 1 |
| 2021 | AC/DC: Alternating Compressed/DeCompressed Training of Deep Neural NetworksabstractThe increasing computational requirements of deep neural networks (DNNs) have led to significant interest in obtaining DNN models that are sparse, yet accurate. Recent work has investigated the even harder case of sparse training, where the DNN weights are, for as much as possible, already sparse to reduce computational costs during training. Existing sparse training methods are often empirical and can have lower accuracy relative to the dense baseline. In this paper, we present a general approach called Alternating Compressed/DeCompressed (AC/DC) training of DNNs, demonstrate convergence for a variant of the algorithm, and show that AC/DC outperforms existing sparse training methods in accuracy at similar computational budgets; at high sparsity levels, AC/DC even outperforms existing methods that rely on accurate pre-trained dense models. An important property of AC/DC is that it allows co-training of dense and sparse models, yielding accurate sparse-dense model pairs at the end of the training process. This is useful in practice, where compressed variants may be desirable for deployment in resource-constrained settings without re-doing the entire training flow, and also provides us with insights into the accuracy gap between dense and compressed models. Alexandra Peste, Eugenia Iofinova, Adrian Vladu, Dan Alistarh |
NeurIPS | 2 |