Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jingming Yan
dblp:390/1607
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
1as 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 · 1 first-author · 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.
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Computational complexity · 52% Mathematical optimization · 35% Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 13% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 87% Representation and self-supervised learning · 13% |
Topics — the 11 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Mathematical optimization
minimax optimization |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum Games · NeurIPS 2025 Learning Equilibria in Adversarial Team Markov Games: A Nonconvex-Hidden-Concave Min-Max Optimization Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Computational complexity › complexity classes › TFNP
CLS |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Complexity of Finding Local Optima in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computational complexity › game complexity
complexity of equilibrium computation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum Games · NeurIPS 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
equilibrium computation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum Games · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computational complexity › search problems
local search complexity |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Complexity of Finding Local Optima in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computational complexity › complexity classes › PPAD
PPAD-completeness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum Games · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-agent reinforcement learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Learning Equilibria in Adversarial Team Markov Games: A Nonconvex-Hidden-Concave Min-Max Optimization Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › multi-agent reinforcement learning › equilibrium learning
nash equilibrium learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Learning Equilibria in Adversarial Team Markov Games: A Nonconvex-Hidden-Concave Min-Max Optimization Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Mathematical optimization › minimax optimization
nonconvex-concave saddle point problem |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Learning Equilibria in Adversarial Team Markov Games: A Nonconvex-Hidden-Concave Min-Max Optimization Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
contrastive learning |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | The Complexity of Finding Local Optima in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › policy optimization
policy gradient |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Learning Equilibria in Adversarial Team Markov Games: A Nonconvex-Hidden-Concave Min-Max Optimization Problem · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
CLS reductions · 1.7weakly-smooth optimization · 1.5policy gradient · 1.5non-convex optimization · 1.5reduction · 0.9polymatrix games · 0.9PLS reductions · 0.9PLS reduction · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum GamesabstractWe consider the problem of computing stationary points in min-max optimization, with a focus on the special case of Nash equilibria in (two-)team zero-sum games. We first show that computing $\epsilon$-Nash equilibria in $3$-player $\text{\emph{adversarial}}$ team games---wherein a team of $2$ players competes against a $\text{\emph{single}}$ adversary---is $\textsf{CLS}$-complete, resolving the complexity of Nash equilibria in such settings. Our proof proceeds by reducing from $\text{\emph{symmetric}}$ $\epsilon$-Nash equilibria in $\text{\emph{symmetric}}$, identical-payoff, two-player games, by suitably leveraging the adversarial player so as to enforce symmetry---without disturbing the structure of the game. In particular, the class of instances we construct comprises solely polymatrix games, thereby also settling a question left open by Hollender, Maystre, and Nagarajan (2024).
Moreover, we establish that computing $\text{\emph{symmetric}}$ (first-order) equilibria in $\text{\emph{symmetric}}$ min-max optimization is $\textsf{PPAD}$-complete, even for quadratic functions. Building on this reduction, we show that computing symmetric $\epsilon$-Nash equilibria in symmetric, $6$-player ($3$ vs. $3$) team zero-sum games is also $\textsf{PPAD}$-complete, even for $\epsilon = \text{poly}(1/n)$. As a corollary, this precludes the existence of symmetric dynamics---which includes many of the algorithms considered in the literature---converging to stationary points. Finally, we prove that computing a $\text{\emph{non-symmetric}}$ $\text{poly}(1/n)$-equilibrium in symmetric min-max optimization is $\textsf{FNP}$-hard. Ioannis Anagnostides, Ioannis Panageas, Tuomas Sandholm, Jingming Yan |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2025 | The Complexity of Finding Local Optima in Contrastive LearningabstractContrastive learning is a powerful technique for discovering meaningful data representations by optimizing objectives based on $\textit{contrastive information}$, often given as a set of weighted triplets $\{(x_i, y_i^+, z_{i}^-)\}_{i = 1}^m$ indicating that an "anchor" $x_i$ is more similar to a "positive" example $y_i$ than to a "negative" example $z_i$. The goal is to find representations (e.g., embeddings in $\mathbb{R}^d$ or a tree metric) where anchors are placed closer to positive than to negative examples. While finding $\textit{global}$ optima of contrastive objectives is $\mathsf{NP}$-hard, the complexity of finding $\text{\textit{local}}$ optima---representations that do not improve by local search algorithms such as gradient-based methods---remains open. Our work settles the complexity of finding local optima in various contrastive learning problems by proving $\mathsf{PLS}$-hardness in discrete settings (e.g., maximize satisfied triplets) and $\mathsf{CLS}$-hardness in continuous settings (e.g., minimize Triplet Loss), where $\mathsf{PLS}$ (Polynomial Local Search) and $\mathsf{CLS}$ (Continuous Local Search) are well-studied complexity classes capturing local search dynamics in discrete and continuous optimization, respectively. Our results imply that no polynomial time algorithm (local search or otherwise) can find a local optimum for various contrastive learning problems, unless $\mathsf{PLS}\subseteq\mathsf{P}$ (or $\mathsf{CLS}\subseteq \mathsf{P}$ for continuous problems). Even in the unlikely scenario that $\mathsf{PLS}\subseteq\mathsf{P}$ (or $\mathsf{CLS}\subseteq \mathsf{P}$), our reductions imply that there exist instances where local search algorithms need exponential time to reach a local optimum, even for $d=1$ (embeddings on a line). Jingming Yan, Yiyuan Luo, Vaggos Chatziafratis, Ioannis Panageas, Parnian Shahkar, Stelios Stavroulakis |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2024 | Learning Equilibria in Adversarial Team Markov Games: A Nonconvex-Hidden-Concave Min-Max Optimization ProblemabstractWe study the problem of learning a Nash equilibrium (NE) in Markov games which is a cornerstone in multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL). In particular, we focus on infinite-horizon adversarial team Markov games (ATMGs) in which agents that share a common reward function compete against a single opponent, *the adversary*. These games unify two-player zero-sum Markov games and Markov potential games, resulting in a setting that encompasses both collaboration and competition. Kalogiannis et al. (2023) provided an efficient equilibrium computation algorithm for ATMGs which presumes knowledge of the reward and transition functions and has no sample complexity guarantees. We contribute a learning algorithm that utilizes MARL policy gradient methods with iteration and sample complexity that is polynomial in the approximation error $\epsilon$ and the natural parameters of the ATMG, resolving the main caveats of the solution by (Kalogiannis et al., 2023). It is worth noting that previously, the existence of learning algorithms for NE was known for Markov two-player zero-sum and potential games but not for ATMGs.
Seen through the lens of min-max optimization, computing a NE in these games consists a nonconvex--nonconcave saddle-point problem. Min-max optimization has received an extensive study. Nevertheless, the case of nonconvex--nonconcave landscapes remains elusive: in full generality, finding saddle-points is computationally intractable (Daskalakis et al., 2021). We circumvent the aforementioned intractability by developing techniques that exploit the hidden structure of the objective function via a nonconvex--concave reformulation. However, this introduces a challenge of a feasibility set with coupled constraints. We tackle these challenges by establishing novel techniques for optimizing weakly-smooth nonconvex functions, extending the framework of (Devolder et al., 2014). Fivos Kalogiannis, Jingming Yan, Ioannis Panageas |
NeurIPS | 2 |