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

Jingming Yan

dblp:390/1607 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Mathematical optimization
minimax optimization
1.622025
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
0.912025
The Complexity of Finding Local Optima in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2025
Computational complexity › game complexity
complexity of equilibrium computation
0.912025
The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum Games · NeurIPS 2025
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
equilibrium computation
0.912025
The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum Games · NeurIPS 2025
Computational complexity › search problems
local search complexity
0.912025
The Complexity of Finding Local Optima in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2025
Computational complexity › complexity classes › PPAD
PPAD-completeness
0.912025
The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum Games · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-agent reinforcement learning
0.812024
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
0.812024
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
0.812024
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
0.312025
The Complexity of Finding Local Optima in Contrastive Learning · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › policy optimization
policy gradient
0.212024
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 The Complexity of Symmetric Equilibria in Min-Max Optimization and Team Zero-Sum Games
abstract
We 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
NeurIPS4
2025 The Complexity of Finding Local Optima in Contrastive Learning
abstract
Contrastive 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
NeurIPS1
2024 Learning Equilibria in Adversarial Team Markov Games: A Nonconvex-Hidden-Concave Min-Max Optimization Problem
abstract
We 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
NeurIPS2