EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jason Vander Woude
dblp:322/1237
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Theory of computation · 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.
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Learning theory · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Computational complexity · 80% Computational geometry · 11% Approximation and online algorithms · 9% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning theory › computational learning theory › replicable learning
list replicability |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | List and Certificate Complexities in Replicable Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
PAC learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | List and Certificate Complexities in Replicable Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › computational learning theory
replicable learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | List and Certificate Complexities in Replicable Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
statistical query learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | List and Certificate Complexities in Replicable Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Computational complexity
circuit complexity |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Pseudodeterminism: promises and lowerbounds · STOC 2022 |
Computational complexity › randomized computation
pseudodeterministic algorithms |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Pseudodeterminism: promises and lowerbounds · STOC 2022 |
Computational complexity
randomized computation |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Pseudodeterminism: promises and lowerbounds · STOC 2022 |
Approximation and online algorithms
approximation algorithms |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | List and Certificate Complexities in Replicable Learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
partition construction · 1.5combinatorial topology · 1.5geometric partitioning · 1.3Sperner/KKM lemma · 1.3rounding schemes · 0.7rounding scheme · 0.7probabilistic algorithm analysis · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Replicability in Learning: Geometric Partitions and KKM-Sperner LemmaabstractThis paper studies replicability in machine learning tasks from a geometric viewpoint. Recent works have revealed the role of geometric partitions and Sperner's lemma (and its variations) in designing replicable learning algorithms and in establishing impossibility results.
A partition $\mathcal{P}$ of $\mathbb{R}^d$ is called a $(k,\epsilon)$-secluded partition if for every $\vec{p}\in\mathbb{R}^d$, an $\varepsilon$-radius ball (with respect to the $\ell_{\infty}$ norm) centered at $\vec{p}$ intersects at most $k$ members of $\mathcal{P}$. In relation to replicable learning, the parameter $k$ is closely related to the $\textit{list complexity}$, and the parameter $\varepsilon$ is related to the sample complexity of the replicable learner. Construction of secluded partitions with better parameters (small $k$ and large $\varepsilon$) will lead to replicable learning algorithms with small list and sample complexities.
Motivated by this connection, we undertake a comprehensive study of secluded partitions and establish near-optimal relationships between $k$ and $\varepsilon$.
1. We show that for any $(k,\epsilon)$-secluded partition where each member has at most unit measure, it must be that $k \geq(1+2\varepsilon)^d$, and consequently, for the interesting regime $k\in[2^d]$ it must be that $\epsilon\leq\frac{\log_4(k)}{d}$.
2. To complement this upper bound on $\epsilon$, we show that for each $d\in\mathbb{N}$ and each viable $k\in[2^d]$, a construction of a $(k,\epsilon)$-secluded (unit cube) partition with $\epsilon\geq\frac{\log_4(k)}{d}\cdot\frac{1}{8\log_4(d+1)}$. This establishes the optimality of $\epsilon$ within a logarithmic factor.
3. Finally, we adapt our proof techniques to obtain a new ``neighborhood'' variant of the cubical KKM lemma (or cubical Sperner's lemma): For any coloring of $[0,1]^d$ in which no color is used on opposing faces, it holds for each $\epsilon\in(0,\frac12]$ that there is a point where the open $\epsilon$-radius $\ell_\infty$-ball intersects at least $(1+\frac23\epsilon)^d$ colors. While the classical Sperner/KKM lemma guarantees the existence of a point that is "adjacent" to points with $(d+1)$ distinct colors, the neighborhood version guarantees the existence of a small neighborhood with exponentially many points with distinct colors. Jason Vander Woude, Peter Dixon 0002, Aduri Pavan, Jamie Radcliffe, N. V. Vinodchandran |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2023 | List and Certificate Complexities in Replicable LearningabstractWe investigate replicable learning algorithms. Informally a learning algorithm is replicable if the algorithm outputs the same canonical hypothesis over multiple runs with high probability, even when different runs observe a different set of samples from the unknown data distribution. In general, such a strong notion of replicability is not achievable.
Thus we consider two feasible notions of replicability called {\em list replicability} and {\em certificate replicability}.
Intuitively, these notions capture the degree of (non) replicability. The goal is to design learning algorithms with optimal list and certificate complexities while minimizing the sample complexity. Our contributions are the following.
1. We first study the learning task of estimating the biases of $d$ coins, up to an additive error of $\varepsilon$, by observing samples. For this task, we design a $(d+1)$-list replicable algorithm. To complement this result, we establish that the list complexity is optimal, i.e there are no learning algorithms with a list size smaller than $d+1$ for this task. We also design learning algorithms with certificate complexity $\tilde{O}(\log d)$. The sample complexity of both these algorithms is $\tilde{O}(\frac{d^2}{\varepsilon^2})$ where $\varepsilon$ is the approximation error parameter (for a constant error probability).
2. In the PAC model, we show that any hypothesis class that is learnable with $d$-nonadaptive statistical queries can be learned via a $(d+1)$-list replicable algorithm and also via a $\tilde{O}(\log d)$-certificate replicable algorithm. The sample complexity of both these algorithms is $\tilde{O}(\frac{d^2}{\nu^2})$ where $\nu$ is the approximation error of the statistical query. We also show that for the concept class \dtep, the list complexity is exactly $d+1$ with respect to the uniform distribution.
To establish our upper bound results we use rounding schemes induced by geometric partitions with certain properties. We use Sperner/KKM Lemma to establish the lower bound results. Peter Dixon 0002, Aduri Pavan, Jason Vander Woude, N. V. Vinodchandran |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2022 | Pseudodeterminism: promises and lowerboundsabstractA probabilistic algorithm A is pseudodeterministic if, on every input, there exists a canonical value that is output with high probability. If the algorithm outputs one of k canonical values with high probability, then it is called a k-pseudodeterministic algorithm. In the study of pseudodeterminism, the Acceptance Probability Estimation Problem (APEP), which is to additively approximate the acceptance probability of a Boolean circuit, is emerging as a central computational problem. This problem admits a 2-pseudodeterministic algorithm. Recently, it was shown that a pseudodeterministic algorithm for this problem would imply that any multi-valued function that admits a k-pseudodeterministic algorithm for a constant k (including approximation algorithms) also admits a pseudodeterministic algorithm (Dixon, Pavan, Vinodchandran; ITCS 2021). Peter Dixon 0002, Aduri Pavan, Jason Vander Woude, N. V. Vinodchandran |
STOC | 3 |