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

Natalia Flerova

dblp:64/11445 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 2 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1

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
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 77% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 23%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › heuristic search
best-first search
0.112012
Search Algorithms for m Best Solutions for Graphical Models · AAAI 2012
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
graphical models
0.112012
Search Algorithms for m Best Solutions for Graphical Models · AAAI 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
heuristic search
0.112012
Search Algorithms for m Best Solutions for Graphical Models · AAAI 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › soft constraints › valued constraint satisfaction
weighted constraint satisfaction
0.112012
Search Algorithms for m Best Solutions for Graphical Models · AAAI 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › heuristic search
branch-and-bound search
0.012012
Search Algorithms for m Best Solutions for Graphical Models · AAAI 2012

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

depth-first search · 0.1branch-and-bound · 0.1a* · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 Searching for the M Best Solutions in Graphical Models
abstract
The paper focuses on finding the m best solutions to combinatorial optimization problems using best-first or depth-first branch and bound search. Specifically, we present a new algorithm m-A*, extending the well-known A* to the m-best task, and for the first time prove that all its desirable properties, including soundness, completeness and optimal efficiency, are maintained. Since best-first algorithms require extensive memory, we also extend the memory-efficient depth-first branch and bound to the m-best task. We adapt both algorithms to optimization tasks over graphical models (e.g., Weighted CSP and MPE in Bayesian networks), provide complexity analysis and an empirical evaluation. Our experiments confirm theory that the best-first approach is largely superior when memory is available, but depth-first branch and bound is more robust. We also show that our algorithms are competitive with related schemes recently developed for the m-best task.
Natalia Flerova, Radu Marinescu 0002, Rina Dechter
J. Artif. Intell. Res.1
2014 Evaluating Weighted DFS Branch and Bound over Graphical Models
abstract
Weighted search was explored significantly in recent years for path-finding problems, but until now was barely considered for optimization tasks such as MPE/MAP and Weighted CSPs. An important virtue of weighted search schemes, especially in the context of anytime search, is that they are w-optimal, i.e. when terminated, they return a weight w, and a solution cost C, such that C ≤ w · C*, where C* is the optimal cost. In this paper we introduce Weighted Branch and Bound (WBB) for graphical models and provide a broad empirical evaluation of its performance compared with one of the best unweighted anytime search scheme, BRAOBB (won Pascal 2011 competition). We also compare against weighted best-first (WBF). Our results show that W BB can be superior to both unweighted BB and to weighted BF on a significant number of instances. We also illustrate the benefit of weighted search in providing suboptimality relative error bounds.
Natalia Flerova, Radu Marinescu 0002, Rina Dechter
SOCS1
2012 Search Algorithms for m Best Solutions for Graphical Models
abstract
The paper focuses on finding the m best solutions to combinatorial optimization problems using Best-First or Branchand- Bound search. Specifically, we present m-A*, extending the well-known A* to the m-best task, and prove that all its desirable properties, including soundness, completeness and optimal efficiency, are maintained. Since Best-First algorithms have memory problems, we also extend the memoryefficient Depth-First Branch-and-Bound to the m-best task. We extend both algorithms to optimization tasks over graphical models (e.g., Weighted CSP and MPE in Bayesian networks), provide complexity analysis and an empirical evaluation. Our experiments with 5 variants of Best-First and Branch-and-Bound confirm that Best-First is largely superior when memory is available, but Branch-and-Bound is more robust, while both styles of search benefit greatly when the heuristic evaluation function has increased accuracy.
Rina Dechter, Natalia Flerova, Radu Marinescu 0002
AAAI2
2012 Join-graph based cost-shifting schemes
Alexander Ihler, Natalia Flerova, Rina Dechter, Lars Otten
UAI2