Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Paymon Haddad
dblp:376/2061
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
1 paper |
Learning theory · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Changing the Training Data Distribution to Reduce Simplicity Bias Improves In-distribution Generalization · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › inductive bias
simplicity bias |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Changing the Training Data Distribution to Reduce Simplicity Bias Improves In-distribution Generalization · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
upsampling · 0.8sharpness-aware minimization · 0.8gradient descent · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Changing the Training Data Distribution to Reduce Simplicity Bias Improves In-distribution GeneralizationabstractCan we modify the training data distribution to encourage the underlying optimization method toward finding solutions with superior generalization performance on in-distribution data? In this work, we approach this question for the first time by comparing the inductive bias of gradient descent (GD) with that of sharpness-aware minimization (SAM). By studying a two-layer CNN, we rigorously prove that SAM learns different features more uniformly, particularly in early epochs. That is, SAM is less susceptible to simplicity bias compared to GD. We also show that examples constraining features that are learned early are separable from the rest based on the model’s output. Based on this observation, we propose a method that (i) clusters examples based on the network output early in training, (ii) identifies a cluster of examples with similar network output, and (iii) upsamples the rest of examples only once to alleviate the simplicity bias. We show empirically that USEFUL effectively improves the generalization performance on the original data distribution when training with various gradient methods, including (S)GD and SAM. Notably, we demonstrate that our method can be combined with SAM variants and existing data augmentation strategies to achieve, to the best of our knowledge, state-of-the-art performance for training ResNet18 on CIFAR10, STL10, CINIC10, Tiny-ImageNet; ResNet34 on CIFAR100; and VGG19 and DenseNet121 on CIFAR10. Paymon Haddad, Eric Gan, Baharan Mirzasoleiman |
NeurIPS | 2 |