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

Peter J. Seiler

dblp:48/185 · also Pete Seiler 0001, Peter Seiler 0001 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0003-3423-1109ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 3 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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
3 papers
Motion planning and robot control · 68% Language models and text generation · 26% Reinforcement learning · 6%
Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Mathematical optimization · 67% Computational complexity · 33%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computing education · 77% Computational science and engineering · 23%

Topics — the 11 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation
0.912025
Toward Engineering AGI: Benchmarking the Engineering Design Capabilities of LLMs · NeurIPS 2025
Computing education › STEM education
engineering design education
0.912025
Toward Engineering AGI: Benchmarking the Engineering Design Capabilities of LLMs · NeurIPS 2025
Mathematical optimization
black-box optimization
0.712023
Complexity of Derivative-Free Policy Optimization for Structured H∞ Control · NeurIPS 2023
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › robot control
controller design
0.612022
Recurrent Neural Network Controllers Synthesis with Stability Guarantees for Partially Observed Systems · AAAI 2022
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › robot control
neural network controller
0.612022
Recurrent Neural Network Controllers Synthesis with Stability Guarantees for Partially Observed Systems · AAAI 2022
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control
robot control
0.612022
Recurrent Neural Network Controllers Synthesis with Stability Guarantees for Partially Observed Systems · AAAI 2022
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › stability analysis
stability guarantees
0.612022
Recurrent Neural Network Controllers Synthesis with Stability Guarantees for Partially Observed Systems · AAAI 2022
Mathematical optimization
convergence analysis
0.312017
A Unified Analysis of Stochastic Optimization Methods Using Jump System Theory and Quadratic Constraints · COLT 2017
Mathematical optimization
stochastic optimization
0.312017
A Unified Analysis of Stochastic Optimization Methods Using Jump System Theory and Quadratic Constraints · COLT 2017
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy optimization
0.212023
Complexity of Derivative-Free Policy Optimization for Structured H∞ Control · NeurIPS 2023
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization
convex optimization
0.112017
A Unified Analysis of Stochastic Optimization Methods Using Jump System Theory and Quadratic Constraints · COLT 2017

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

simulation-based evaluation · 1.7h∞ control · 1.3derivative-free optimization · 1.3s-lemma · 0.6projected policy gradient · 0.6integral quadratic constraints · 0.6quadratic constraints · 0.3linear matrix inequality · 0.3jump system theory · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Toward Engineering AGI: Benchmarking the Engineering Design Capabilities of LLMs
abstract
Modern engineering, spanning electrical, mechanical, aerospace, civil, and computer disciplines, stands as a cornerstone of human civilization and the foundation of our society. However, engineering design poses a fundamentally different challenge for large language models (LLMs) compared with traditional textbook-style problem solving or factual question answering. Although existing benchmarks have driven progress in areas such as language understanding, code synthesis, and scientific problem solving, real-world engineering design demands the synthesis of domain knowledge, navigation of complex trade-offs, and management of the tedious processes that consume much of practicing engineers' time. Despite these shared challenges across engineering disciplines, no benchmark currently captures the unique demands of engineering design work. In this work, we introduce EngDesign, an Engineering Design benchmark that evaluates LLMs' abilities to perform practical design tasks across nine engineering domains. Unlike existing benchmarks that focus on factual recall or question answering, EngDesign uniquely emphasizes LLMs' ability to synthesize domain knowledge, reason under constraints, and generate functional, objective-oriented engineering designs. Each task in EngDesign represents a real-world engineering design problem, accompanied by a detailed task description specifying design goals, constraints, and performance requirements. EngDesign pioneers a simulation-based evaluation paradigm that moves beyond textbook knowledge to assess genuine engineering design capabilities and shifts evaluation from static answer checking to dynamic, simulation-driven functional verification, marking a crucial step toward realizing the vision of engineering Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).
Xingang Guo, Xiangyi Kong, Yilan Jiang, Xiayu Zhao, Zhihua Gong, Daixuan Li, Tianle Sang, Beixiao Zhu, Gregory Jun, Yingbing Huang, Yuqi Xue, Rahul Dev Kundu, Qi Jian Lim, Luke Alexander Granger, Mohamed Badr Younis, Darioush Keivan, Nippun Sabharwal, Shreyanka Sinha, Prakhar Agarwal, Kojo Vandyck, Hanlin Mai, Aditya Venkatesh, Ayush Barik, Jiankun Yang, Chongying Yue, Jingjie He, Licheng Xu, Liujun Xu, Rushabh Shetty, Ziheng Guo, Dahui Song, Manvi Jha, Weijie Liang, Weiman Yan, Bryan Zhang, Sahil Bhandary Karnoor, Rutva Pandya, Xinyi Gong, Mithesh Ballae Ganesh, Feize Shi, Ruiling Xu, Yanfeng Ouyang, Lianhui Qin, Elyse Rosenbaum, Corey Snyder, Peter J. Seiler, Geir E. Dullerud, Xiaojia Shelly Zhang, Zuofu Cheng, Pavan Kumar Hanumolu, Mayank Kulkarni, Mahdi Namazifar, Bin Hu 0002
NeurIPS56
2023 Complexity of Derivative-Free Policy Optimization for Structured H∞ Control
Xingang Guo, Darioush Keivan, Geir E. Dullerud, Peter J. Seiler, Bin Hu 0002
NeurIPS4
2022 Recurrent Neural Network Controllers Synthesis with Stability Guarantees for Partially Observed Systems
abstract
Neural network controllers have become popular in control tasks thanks to their flexibility and expressivity. Stability is a crucial property for safety-critical dynamical systems, while stabilization of partially observed systems, in many cases, requires controllers to retain and process long-term memories of the past. We consider the important class of recurrent neural networks (RNN) as dynamic controllers for nonlinear uncertain partially-observed systems, and derive convex stability conditions based on integral quadratic constraints, S-lemma and sequential convexification. To ensure stability during the learning and control process, we propose a projected policy gradient method that iteratively enforces the stability conditions in the reparametrized space taking advantage of mild additional information on system dynamics. Numerical experiments show that our method learns stabilizing controllers with fewer samples and achieves higher final performance compared with policy gradient.
Fangda Gu, He Yin, Laurent El Ghaoui, Murat Arcak, Peter J. Seiler, Ming Jin 0002
AAAI5
2017 A Unified Analysis of Stochastic Optimization Methods Using Jump System Theory and Quadratic Constraints
abstract
We develop a simple routine unifying the analysis of several important recently-developed stochastic optimization methods including SAGA, Finito, and stochastic dual coordinate ascent (SDCA). First, we show an intrinsic connection between stochastic optimization methods and dynamic jump systems, and propose a general jump system model for stochastic optimization methods. Our proposed model recovers SAGA, SDCA, Finito, and SAG as special cases. Then we combine jump system theory with several simple quadratic inequalities to derive sufficient conditions for convergence rate certifications of the proposed jump system model under various assumptions (with or without individual convexity, etc). The derived conditions are linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) whose size roughly scale with the size of the training set. We make use of the symmetry in the stochastic optimization methods and reduce these LMIs to some equivalent small LMIs whose sizes are at most 3 by 3. We solve these small LMIs to provide analytical proofs of new convergence rates for SAGA, Finito and SDCA (with or without individual convexity). We also explain why our proposed LMI fails in analyzing SAG. We reveal a key difference between SAG and other methods, and briefly discuss how to extend our LMI analysis for SAG. An advantage of our approach is that the proposed analysis can be automated for a large class of stochastic methods under various assumptions (with or without individual convexity, etc).
Bin Hu 0002, Peter J. Seiler, Anders Rantzer
COLT2