Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ildus Sadrtdinov
dblp:298/1173
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
2 papers |
Kernel, tree and ensemble methods · 34% Transfer learning and domain adaptation · 23% Optimization for machine learning · 19% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
fine-tuning |
0.9 | 2 | 2024 | To Stay or Not to Stay in the Pre-train Basin: Insights on Ensembling in Transfer Learning · NeurIPS 2023 Where Do Large Learning Rates Lead Us? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
learning rate schedule |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Where Do Large Learning Rates Lead Us? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › loss landscape
loss landscape geometry |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Where Do Large Learning Rates Lead Us? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods
ensemble learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | To Stay or Not to Stay in the Pre-train Basin: Insights on Ensembling in Transfer Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods › ensemble learning › neural network ensemble
snapshot ensembles |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | To Stay or Not to Stay in the Pre-train Basin: Insights on Ensembling in Transfer Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model merging
model soup |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | To Stay or Not to Stay in the Pre-train Basin: Insights on Ensembling in Transfer Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
weight averaging · 0.8fine-tuning · 0.8empirical study · 0.8snapshot ensembles · 0.7loss landscape exploration · 0.7StarSSE · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Where Do Large Learning Rates Lead Us?abstractIt is generally accepted that starting neural networks training with large learning rates (LRs) improves generalization. Following a line of research devoted to understanding this effect, we conduct an empirical study in a controlled setting focusing on two questions: 1) how large an initial LR is required for obtaining optimal quality, and 2) what are the key differences between models trained with different LRs? We discover that only a narrow range of initial LRs slightly above the convergence threshold lead to optimal results after fine-tuning with a small LR or weight averaging. By studying the local geometry of reached minima, we observe that using LRs from this optimal range allows for the optimization to locate a basin that only contains high-quality minima. Additionally, we show that these initial LRs result in a sparse set of learned features, with a clear focus on those most relevant for the task. In contrast, starting training with too small LRs leads to unstable minima and attempts to learn all features simultaneously, resulting in poor generalization. Conversely, using initial LRs that are too large fails to detect a basin with good solutions and extract meaningful patterns from the data. Ildus Sadrtdinov, Maxim Kodryan, Eduard Pokonechny, Ekaterina Lobacheva, Dmitry P. Vetrov |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2023 | To Stay or Not to Stay in the Pre-train Basin: Insights on Ensembling in Transfer LearningabstractTransfer learning and ensembling are two popular techniques for improving the performance and robustness of neural networks.
Due to the high cost of pre-training, ensembles of models fine-tuned from a single pre-trained checkpoint are often used in practice.
Such models end up in the same basin of the loss landscape, which we call the pre-train basin, and thus have limited diversity.
In this work, we show that ensembles trained from a single pre-trained checkpoint may be improved by better exploring the pre-train basin, however, leaving the basin results in losing the benefits of transfer learning and in degradation of the ensemble quality.
Based on the analysis of existing exploration methods, we propose a more effective modification of the Snapshot Ensembles (SSE) for transfer learning setup, StarSSE, which results in stronger ensembles and uniform model soups. Ildus Sadrtdinov, Dmitrii Pozdeev, Dmitry P. Vetrov, Ekaterina Lobacheva |
NeurIPS | 1 |