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

Sourabh Medapati

dblp:325/5349 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 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 · 38% Robot navigation and mapping · 29% Deep learning architectures and training · 25%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Information retrieval · 100%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
neural network training acceleration
0.912025
Accelerating neural network training: An analysis of the AlgoPerf competition · ICLR 2025
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping
visual memory
0.912025
Towards flexible perception with visual memory · ICML 2025
Information retrieval
similarity search
0.912025
Towards flexible perception with visual memory · ICML 2025
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer
0.812024
Amortized Planning with Large-Scale Transformers: A Case Study on Chess · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › embedding learning
image embedding
0.312025
Towards flexible perception with visual memory · ICML 2025
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
preconditioning
0.312025
Accelerating neural network training: An analysis of the AlgoPerf competition · ICLR 2025

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

unlearning · 1.7nearest neighbor search · 1.7memory pruning · 1.7schedule-free adamw · 0.9hyperparameter tuning · 0.9distributed shampoo · 0.9supervised learning · 0.8behavioral cloning · 0.8action-value prediction · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Accelerating neural network training: An analysis of the AlgoPerf competition
abstract
The goal of the AlgoPerf: Training Algorithms competition is to evaluate practical speed-ups in neural network training achieved solely by improving the underlying training algorithms. In the external tuning ruleset, submissions must provide workload-agnostic hyperparameter search spaces, while in the self-tuning ruleset they must be completely hyperparameter-free. In both rulesets, submissions are compared on time-to-result across multiple deep learning workloads, training on fixed hardware. This paper presents the inaugural AlgoPerf competition's results, which drew 18 diverse submissions from 10 teams. Our investigation reveals several key findings: (1) The winning submission in the external tuning ruleset, using Distributed Shampoo, demonstrates the effectiveness of non-diagonal preconditioning over popular methods like Adam, even when compared on wall-clock runtime. (2) The winning submission in the self-tuning ruleset, based on the Schedule Free AdamW algorithm, demonstrates a new level of effectiveness for completely hyperparameter-free training algorithms. (3) The top-scoring submissions were surprisingly robust to workload changes. We also discuss the engineering challenges encountered in ensuring a fair comparison between different training algorithms. These results highlight both the significant progress so far, and the considerable room for further improvements.
Priya Kasimbeg, Frank Schneider 0001, Runa Eschenhagen, Juhan Bae, Chandramouli Shama Sastry, Mark Saroufim, Boyuan Feng, Less Wright, Edward Z. Yang, Zachary Nado, Sourabh Medapati, Philipp Hennig, Michael G. Rabbat, George E. Dahl
ICLR11
2025 Towards flexible perception with visual memory
abstract
Training a neural network is a monolithic endeavor, akin to carving knowledge into stone: once the process is completed, editing the knowledge in a network is hard, since all information is distributed across the network's weights. We here explore a simple, compelling alternative by marrying the representational power of deep neural networks with the flexibility of a database. Decomposing the task of image classification into image similarity (from a pre-trained embedding) and search (via fast nearest neighbor retrieval from a knowledge database), we build on well-established components to construct a simple and flexible visual memory that has the following key capabilities: (1.) The ability to flexibly add data across scales: from individual samples all the way to entire classes and billion-scale data; (2.) The ability to remove data through unlearning and memory pruning; (3.) An interpretable decision-mechanism on which we can intervene to control its behavior. Taken together, these capabilities comprehensively demonstrate the benefits of an explicit visual memory. We hope that it might contribute to a conversation on how knowledge should be represented in deep vision models---beyond carving it in "stone" weights.
Robert Geirhos, Priyank Jaini, Austin Stone, Sourabh Medapati, Xi Yi, George Toderici, Abhijit Ogale, Jonathon Shlens
ICML4
2024 Amortized Planning with Large-Scale Transformers: A Case Study on Chess
abstract
This paper uses chess, a landmark planning problem in AI, to assess transformers’ performance on a planning task where memorization is futile — even at a large scale. To this end, we release ChessBench, a large-scale benchmark dataset of 10 million chess games with legal move and value annotations (15 billion data points) provided by Stockfish 16, the state-of-the-art chess engine. We train transformers with up to 270 million parameters on ChessBench via supervised learning and perform extensive ablations to assess the impact of dataset size, model size, architecture type, and different prediction targets (state-values, action-values, and behavioral cloning). Our largest models learn to predict action-values for novel boards quite accurately, implying highly non-trivial generalization. Despite performing no explicit search, our resulting chess policy solves challenging chess puzzles and achieves a surprisingly strong Lichess blitz Elo of 2895 against humans (grandmaster level). We also compare to Leela Chess Zero and AlphaZero (trained without supervision via self-play) with and without search. We show that, although a remarkably good approximation of Stockfish’s search-based algorithm can be distilled into large-scale transformers via supervised learning, perfect distillation is still beyond reach, thus making ChessBench well-suited for future research.
Anian Ruoss, Grégoire Delétang, Sourabh Medapati, Jordi Grau-Moya, Elliot Catt, John Reid, Cannada A. Lewis, Joel Veness, Tim Genewein
NeurIPS3