Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Rishav Gupta
dblp:375/5389
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 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.
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Computational complexity · 65% Coding theory · 30% Approximation and online algorithms · 4% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 100% |
Topics — the 12 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › post-quantum cryptography › lattice-based cryptography › lattice problems
closest vector problem |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Mind the Gap? Not for SVP Hardness Under ETH! · ICALP 2026 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › cryptographic assumptions
hardness of lattice problems |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Mind the Gap? Not for SVP Hardness Under ETH! · ICALP 2026 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › post-quantum cryptography
lattice-based cryptography |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Mind the Gap? Not for SVP Hardness Under ETH! · ICALP 2026 |
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › post-quantum cryptography › lattice-based cryptography
shortest vector problem |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Mind the Gap? Not for SVP Hardness Under ETH! · ICALP 2026 |
Coding theory
error-correcting codes |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Tight Lower Bound for Approximating Parametrized Maximum Likelihood Decoding Under ETH · CCC 2026 |
Computational complexity › parameterized complexity
ETH-based lower bounds |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Tight Lower Bound for Approximating Parametrized Maximum Likelihood Decoding Under ETH · CCC 2026 |
Computational complexity › fine-grained complexity
exponential time hypothesis |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Mind the Gap? Not for SVP Hardness Under ETH! · ICALP 2026 |
Computational complexity
fine-grained complexity |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Mind the Gap? Not for SVP Hardness Under ETH! · ICALP 2026 |
Coding theory › error-correcting codes › decoding › decoding algorithms › optimal decoding
maximum-likelihood decoding |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Tight Lower Bound for Approximating Parametrized Maximum Likelihood Decoding Under ETH · CCC 2026 |
Computational complexity
parameterized complexity |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Tight Lower Bound for Approximating Parametrized Maximum Likelihood Decoding Under ETH · CCC 2026 |
Approximation and online algorithms
approximation algorithms |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Tight Lower Bound for Approximating Parametrized Maximum Likelihood Decoding Under ETH · CCC 2026 |
Computational complexity
hardness of approximation |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Tight Lower Bound for Approximating Parametrized Maximum Likelihood Decoding Under ETH · CCC 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
theta function inequality · 2.0reduction · 2.0deterministic reduction · 1.0derandomization · 1.0cover family · 1.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Tight Lower Bound for Approximating Parametrized Maximum Likelihood Decoding Under ETHabstractWe present a simple deterministic reduction which, assuming the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH), yields tight lower bounds for approximating the parameterized Maximum Likelihood Decoding problem (MLD) and the parameterized Nearest Codeword Problem (NCP) within some fixed constant factor. Our starting point is the ETH-based exponential-time hardness of (c, s)-Gap MAXLIN established in [Nir Bitansky et al., 2024]. We transform a (c, s)-Gap MAXLIN instance into an instance of γ-Gap k-MLD via a novel combinatorial object that we call a cover family. We provide both a randomized construction of the required cover families and a subsequent derandomization. Prior to our work, n^{Ω(k)} hardness for constant-factor approximation was only shown under the randomized Gap Exponential Time Hypothesis Gap-ETH [Pasin Manurangsi, 2020], which is a much stronger assumption than ETH. Under ETH, the strongest known lower bound was n^{Ω(k/poly log k)} due to [Mitali Bafna et al., 2025]. Unlike previous approaches that rely on reductions from the hardness of approximating 2-CSP, our reduction provides a more direct and conceptually simpler route to achieving the optimal lower bounds. Rishav Gupta, Bingkai Lin |
CCC | 1 |
| 2026 | Mind the Gap? Not for SVP Hardness Under ETH!abstractWe prove new hardness results for fundamental lattice problems under the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH). Building on a recent breakthrough by Bitansky et al.\ \cite{BHIRW24}, who gave a polynomial-time reduction from $\mathsf{3SAT}$ to the (gap) $\mathsf{MAXLIN}$ problem-a class of CSPs with linear equations over finite fields-we derive ETH hardness for several lattice problems. First, we show that for any $p \in [1, \infty)$, there exists an explicit constant $γ> 1$ such that $\mathsf{CVP}_{p,γ}$ (the $\ell_p$-norm approximate Closest Vector Problem) does not admit a $2^{o(n)}$-time algorithm unless ETH is false. Our reduction is deterministic and proceeds via a direct reduction from (gap) $\mathsf{MAXLIN}$ to $\mathsf{CVP}_{p,γ}$. Our main contribution is a randomized ETH hardness result for $\mathsf{SVP}_{p,γ}$ (the $\ell_p$-norm approximate Shortest Vector Problem) for all $p \in (2, \infty)$. This result relies on a novel geometric property of the integer lattice $\mathbb{Z}^n$ in the $\ell_p$ norm, which says that for any $p \in (2, \infty)$, the number of lattice vectors close to $\frac{1}{2}\vec{1}_n$ (in the $\ell_p$ norm) is exponentially larger than the number of short vectors (namely those close to the origin). We establish this property via a new inequality for the Theta function, which we use to get a randomized reduction from $\mathsf{CVP}_{p,γ}$ to $\mathsf{SVP}_{p,γ'}$. Finally, we also use our ideas to give some minor improvements over prior reductions from $\mathsf{3SAT}$ to $\mathsf{BDD}_{p,α}$ (the Bounded Distance Decoding Problem), yielding better ETH hardness results for $\mathsf{BDD}_{p,α}$ for any $p \in [1, \infty)$ and $α> α_p^{\ddagger}$, where $α_p^{\ddagger}$ is an explicit threshold depending on $p$. Divesh Aggarwal, Rishav Gupta, Aditya Morolia, Chuanqi Zhang |
ICALP | 2 |