EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Pawan Kumar Mudigonda
dblp:87/5298
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 1 first-author · 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 |
Optimization for machine learning · 40% Learning paradigms · 20% Graph learning · 9% | |
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 61% Automated reasoning and model checking · 35% Information theory · 4% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers |
Program verification · 57% Programming languages and type systems · 43% |
Topics — the 19 heaviest of 21, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
multi-task learning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
multi-task optimization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
scalarization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning · NeurIPS 2022 |
Mathematical optimization › discrete optimization › mixed integer linear programming › branching
learning to branch |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch · NeurIPS 2020 |
Mathematical optimization › discrete optimization
mixed integer linear programming |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch · NeurIPS 2020 |
Program verification
neural network verification |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | A Unified View of Piecewise Linear Neural Network Verification · NeurIPS 2018 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
neural network verification |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | A Unified View of Piecewise Linear Neural Network Verification · NeurIPS 2018 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
satisfiability modulo theories |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | A Unified View of Piecewise Linear Neural Network Verification · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
deep probabilistic models |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | DISCO Nets : DISsimilarity COefficients Networks · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | DISCO Nets : DISsimilarity COefficients Networks · NIPS 2016 |
Programming languages and type systems › programming paradigms
differentiable programming |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Adaptive Neural Compilation · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-task reinforcement learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task Learning · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph neural network |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
graph neural networks for combinatorial optimization |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Hybrid Models for Learning to Branch · NeurIPS 2020 |
Mathematical optimization
convex relaxation |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007 |
Mathematical optimization
discrete optimization |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007 |
Mathematical optimization
linear programming relaxation |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007 |
Information theory › estimation theory › bayesian estimation
MAP inference |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007 |
Mathematical optimization › convex relaxation
semidefinite relaxation |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP Estimation · NIPS 2007 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
multi-layer perceptron · 0.9graph neural network · 0.9branch-and-bound · 0.9satisfiability modulo theories · 0.7formal methods · 0.7regularization · 0.6gradient analysis · 0.6neural network · 0.5gradient-based optimization · 0.2dissimilarity coefficient · 0.2second-order cone programming · 0.1linear programming · 0.1convex relaxation · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | In Defense of the Unitary Scalarization for Deep Multi-Task LearningabstractRecent multi-task learning research argues against unitary scalarization, where training simply minimizes the sum of the task losses. Several ad-hoc multi-task optimization algorithms have instead been proposed, inspired by various hypotheses about what makes multi-task settings difficult. The majority of these optimizers require per-task gradients, and introduce significant memory, runtime, and implementation overhead. We show that unitary scalarization, coupled with standard regularization and stabilization techniques from single-task learning, matches or improves upon the performance of complex multi-task optimizers in popular supervised and reinforcement learning settings. We then present an analysis suggesting that many specialized multi-task optimizers can be partly interpreted as forms of regularization, potentially explaining our surprising results. We believe our results call for a critical reevaluation of recent research in the area. Vitaly Kurin, Alessandro De Palma, Ilya Kostrikov, Shimon Whiteson, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda |
NeurIPS | 5 |
| 2020 | Hybrid Models for Learning to BranchabstractA recent Graph Neural Network (GNN) approach for learning to branch has been shown to successfully reduce the running time of branch-and-bound algorithms for Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP). While the GNN relies on a GPU for inference, MILP solvers are purely CPU-based. This severely limits its application as many practitioners may not have access to high-end GPUs. In this work, we ask two key questions. First, in a more realistic setting where only a CPU is available, is the GNN model still competitive? Second, can we devise an alternate computationally inexpensive model that retains the predictive power of the GNN architecture? We answer the first question in the negative, and address the second question by proposing a new hybrid architecture for efficient branching on CPU machines. The proposed architecture combines the expressive power of GNNs with computationally inexpensive multi-layer perceptrons (MLP) for branching. We evaluate our methods on four classes of MILP problems, and show that they lead to up to 26% reduction in solver running time compared to state-of-the-art methods without a GPU, while extrapolating to harder problems than it was trained on. The code for this project is publicly available at https://github.com/pg2455/Hybrid-learn2branch. Prateek Gupta, Maxime Gasse, Elias B. Khalil, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda, Andrea Lodi 0001, Yoshua Bengio |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2018 | A Unified View of Piecewise Linear Neural Network VerificationabstractThe success of Deep Learning and its potential use in many safety-critical applications has motivated research on formal verification of Neural Network (NN) models. Despite the reputation of learned NN models to behave as black boxes and the theoretical hardness of proving their properties, researchers have been successful in verifying some classes of models by exploiting their piecewise linear structure and taking insights from formal methods such as Satisifiability Modulo Theory. These methods are however still far from scaling to realistic neural networks. To facilitate progress on this crucial area, we make two key contributions. First, we present a unified framework that encompasses previous methods. This analysis results in the identification of new methods that combine the strengths of multiple existing approaches, accomplishing a speedup of two orders of magnitude compared to the previous state of the art. Second, we propose a new data set of benchmarks which includes a collection of previously released testcases. We use the benchmark to provide the first experimental comparison of existing algorithms and identify the factors impacting the hardness of verification problems. Rudy Bunel, Ilker Turkaslan, Philip Torr 0001, Pushmeet Kohli, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda |
NeurIPS | 5 |
| 2016 | DISCO Nets : DISsimilarity COefficients NetworksabstractWe present a new type of probabilistic model which we call DISsimilarity COefficient Networks (DISCO Nets). DISCO Nets allow us to efficiently sample from a posterior distribution parametrised by a neural network. During training, DISCO Nets are learned by minimising the dissimilarity coefficient between the true distribution and the estimated distribution. This allows us to tailor the training to the loss related to the task at hand. We empirically show that (i) by modeling uncertainty on the output value, DISCO Nets outperform equivalent non-probabilistic predictive networks and (ii) DISCO Nets accurately model the uncertainty of the output, outperforming existing probabilistic models based on deep neural networks. Diane Bouchacourt, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda, Sebastian Nowozin |
NIPS | 2 |
| 2016 | Adaptive Neural CompilationabstractThis paper proposes an adaptive neural-compilation framework to address the problem of learning efficient program. Traditional code optimisation strategies used in compilers are based on applying pre-specified set of transformations that make the code faster to execute without changing its semantics. In contrast, our work involves adapting programs to make them more efficient while considering correctness only on a target input distribution. Our approach is inspired by the recent works on differentiable representations of programs. We show that it is possible to compile programs written in a low-level language to a differentiable representation. We also show how programs in this representation can be optimised to make them efficient on a target distribution of inputs. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach enables learning specifically-tuned algorithms for given data distributions with a high success rate. Rudy Bunel, Alban Desmaison, Pawan Kumar Mudigonda, Pushmeet Kohli, Philip Torr 0001 |
NIPS | 3 |
| 2007 | An Analysis of Convex Relaxations for MAP EstimationabstractThe problem of obtaining the maximum a posteriori estimate of a general discrete random field (i.e. a random field defined using a finite and discrete set of labels) is known to be N P-hard. However, due to its central importance in many applications, several approximate algorithms have been proposed in the literature. In this paper, we present an analysis of three such algorithms based on convex relaxations: (i) L P - S: the linear programming (L P) relaxation proposed by Schlesinger [20] for a special case and independently in [4, 12, 23] for the general case; (ii) Q P - R L: the quadratic programming (Q P) relaxation by Ravikumar and Lafferty [18]; and (iii) S O C P - M S: the second order cone programming (S O C P) relaxation first proposed by Muramatsu and Suzuki [16] for two label problems and later extended in [14] for a general label set. We show that the S O C P - M S and the Q P - R L relaxations are equivalent. Furthermore, we prove that despite the flexibility in the form of the constraints/objective function offered by Q P and S O C P, the L P - S relaxation strictly dominates (i.e. provides a better approximation than) Q P - R L and S O C P - M S. We generalize these results by defining a large class of S O C P (and equivalent Q P) relaxations which is dominated by the L P - S relaxation. Based on these results we propose some novel S O C P relaxations which strictly dominate the previous approaches. Pawan Kumar Mudigonda, Vladimir Kolmogorov, Philip Torr 0001 |
NIPS | 1 |