Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Omar Hagrass
dblp:336/3215
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 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 |
Learning theory · 49% Language models and text generation · 36% Deep learning architectures and training · 16% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning theory
minimax optimality |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Decoding Game: On Minimax Optimality of Heuristic Text Generation Strategies · ICLR 2025 Spectral Regularized Kernel Goodness-of-Fit Tests · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › decoding
decoding strategy |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Decoding Game: On Minimax Optimality of Heuristic Text Generation Strategies · ICLR 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › decoding › decoding strategy
truncation sampling |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Decoding Game: On Minimax Optimality of Heuristic Text Generation Strategies · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › hypothesis testing
nonparametric hypothesis testing |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Spectral Regularized Kernel Goodness-of-Fit Tests · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › regularization
spectral regularization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Spectral Regularized Kernel Goodness-of-Fit Tests · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
zero-sum game |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Decoding Game: On Minimax Optimality of Heuristic Text Generation Strategies · ICLR 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
top-k sampling · 1.7temperature scaling · 1.7nucleus sampling · 1.7minimax analysis · 1.7tikhonov regularization · 0.8spectral regularization · 0.8maximum mean discrepancy · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Decoding Game: On Minimax Optimality of Heuristic Text Generation StrategiesabstractDecoding strategies play a pivotal role in text generation for modern language models, yet a puzzling gap divides theory and practice. Surprisingly, strategies that should intuitively be optimal, such as Maximum a Posteriori (MAP), often perform poorly in practice. Meanwhile, popular heuristic approaches like Top-$k$ and Nucleus sampling, which employ truncation and normalization of the conditional next-token probabilities, have achieved great empirical success but lack theoretical justifications. In this paper, we propose Decoding Game, a comprehensive theoretical framework which reimagines text generation as a two-player zero-sum game between Strategist, who seeks to produce text credible in the true distribution, and Nature, who distorts the true distribution adversarially. After discussing the decomposibility of multi-step generation, we derive the optimal strategy in closed form for one-step Decoding Game. It is shown that the adversarial Nature imposes an implicit regularization on likelihood maximization, and truncation-normalization methods are first-order approximations to the optimal strategy under this regularization. Additionally, by generalizing the objective and parameters of Decoding Game, near-optimal strategies encompass diverse methods such as greedy search, temperature scaling, and hybrids thereof. Numerical experiments are conducted to complement our theoretical analysis. Sijin Chen, Omar Hagrass, Jason M. Klusowski |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2024 | Spectral Regularized Kernel Goodness-of-Fit TestsabstractMaximum mean discrepancy (MMD) has enjoyed a lot of success in many machine learning and statistical applications, including non-parametric hypothesis testing, because of its ability to handle non-Euclidean data. Recently, it has been demonstrated in Balasubramanian et al. (2021) that the goodness-of-fit test based on MMD is not minimax optimal while a Tikhonov regularized version of it is, for an appropriate choice of the regularization parameter. However, the results in Balasubramanian et al. (2021) are obtained under the restrictive assumptions of the mean element being zero, and the uniform boundedness condition on the eigenfunctions of the integral operator. Moreover, the test proposed in Balasubramanian et al. (2021) is not practical as it is not computable for many kernels. In this paper, we address these shortcomings and extend the results to general spectral regularizers that include Tikhonov regularization. Omar Hagrass, Bharath K. Sriperumbudur |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 1 |