Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Roman Novak
dblp:13/2476
· DBLP profile ↗
18ranked-venue papers
7as first author
6since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0001-5757-6703ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 13 · 4 first-author · 6 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 2 first-authorComputer networks · 2Security and privacy · 1 · 1 first-author
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
13 papers |
Learning theory · 28% Deep learning architectures and training · 26% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 25% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Algorithms and data structures · 100% |
Topics — the 30 heaviest of 35, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory › neural network kernels
neural tangent kernel |
2.8 | 6 | 2022 | Fast Neural Kernel Embeddings for General Activations · NeurIPS 2022 Fast Finite Width Neural Tangent Kernel · ICML 2022 Finite Versus Infinite Neural Networks: an Empirical Study · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process
neural network gaussian process |
2.0 | 4 | 2022 | Fast Neural Kernel Embeddings for General Activations · NeurIPS 2022 Wide Bayesian neural networks have a simple weight posterior: theory and accelerated sampling · ICML 2022 Infinite attention: NNGP and NTK for deep attention networks · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods
kernel methods |
1.3 | 3 | 2021 | Dataset Distillation with Infinitely Wide Convolutional Networks · NeurIPS 2021 Finite Versus Infinite Neural Networks: an Empirical Study · NeurIPS 2020 Wide Neural Networks of Any Depth Evolve as Linear Models Under Gradient Descent · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
neural network theory |
1.0 | 2 | 2022 | Wide Bayesian neural networks have a simple weight posterior: theory and accelerated sampling · ICML 2022 Infinite attention: NNGP and NTK for deep attention networks · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › deep probabilistic models › bayesian deep learning
bayesian neural networks |
1.0 | 2 | 2022 | Wide Bayesian neural networks have a simple weight posterior: theory and accelerated sampling · ICML 2022 Bayesian Deep Convolutional Networks with Many Channels are Gaussian Processes · ICLR (Poster) 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
gaussian process |
0.8 | 2 | 2020 | Infinite attention: NNGP and NTK for deep attention networks · ICML 2020 Deep Neural Networks as Gaussian Processes · ICLR (Poster) 2018 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › adaptive optimization
adam |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Scaling Exponents Across Parameterizations and Optimizers · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
hyperparameter transfer |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Scaling Exponents Across Parameterizations and Optimizers · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory › neural network parameterization
maximal update parameterization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Scaling Exponents Across Parameterizations and Optimizers · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
scaling laws |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Scaling Exponents Across Parameterizations and Optimizers · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › training dynamics
training instability |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Small-scale proxies for large-scale Transformer training instabilities · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › transformer
transformer training |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Small-scale proxies for large-scale Transformer training instabilities · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
markov chain monte carlo |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Wide Bayesian neural networks have a simple weight posterior: theory and accelerated sampling · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory
neural network kernels |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Fast Neural Kernel Embeddings for General Activations · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › sampling
posterior sampling |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Wide Bayesian neural networks have a simple weight posterior: theory and accelerated sampling · ICML 2022 |
Algorithms and data structures
sketching |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Fast Neural Kernel Embeddings for General Activations · NeurIPS 2022 |
Algorithms and data structures › numerical linear algebra › dimensionality reduction
subspace embedding |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Fast Neural Kernel Embeddings for General Activations · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
dataset distillation |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Dataset Distillation with Infinitely Wide Convolutional Networks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › attention mechanism
attention network |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Infinite attention: NNGP and NTK for deep attention networks · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › overparameterized neural network
wide neural networks |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Finite Versus Infinite Neural Networks: an Empirical Study · NeurIPS 2020 |
Programming languages and type systems
library design |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Neural Tangents: Fast and Easy Infinite Neural Networks in Python · ICLR 2020 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › convolutional neural network
bayesian convolutional neural networks |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Bayesian Deep Convolutional Networks with Many Channels are Gaussian Processes · ICLR (Poster) 2019 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training dynamics |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Wide Neural Networks of Any Depth Evolve as Linear Models Under Gradient Descent · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Sensitivity and Generalization in Neural Networks: an Empirical Study · ICLR (Poster) 2018 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Sensitivity and Generalization in Neural Networks: an Empirical Study · ICLR (Poster) 2018 |
High-performance computing › code optimization
loop-level optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Loop Optimization for Divergence Reduction on GPUs with SIMT Architecture · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2015 |
GPUs and heterogeneous computing › GPU microarchitecture
SIMT architecture |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Loop Optimization for Divergence Reduction on GPUs with SIMT Architecture · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2015 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
bayesian inference |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Wide Bayesian neural networks have a simple weight posterior: theory and accelerated sampling · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
reparameterization |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Wide Bayesian neural networks have a simple weight posterior: theory and accelerated sampling · ICML 2022 |
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
image classification |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Dataset Distillation with Infinitely Wide Convolutional Networks · NeurIPS 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
neural tangent kernel · 1.9gaussian process · 1.2empirical study · 0.8weight decay · 0.8warm-up · 0.8muparam · 0.8sketching · 0.6repriorisation · 0.6reparameterization · 0.6markov chain monte carlo · 0.6jacobian computation · 0.6hermite expansion · 0.6scheduling policy analysis · 0.2loop transformation · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Small-scale proxies for large-scale Transformer training instabilitiesabstractTeams that have trained large Transformer-based models have reported training instabilities at large scale that did not appear when training with the same hyperparameters at smaller scales. Although the causes of such instabilities are of scientific interest, the amount of resources required to reproduce them has made investigation difficult. In this work, we seek ways to reproduce and study training instability at smaller scales. First, we focus on two sources of training instability described in previous work: the growth of logits in attention layers (Dehghani et al., 2023) and divergence of the output logits from the log probabilities (Chowdhery et al., 2022). By measuring the relationship between learning rate and loss across scales, we show that these instabilities also appear in small models when training at high learning rates, and that mitigations previously employed at large scales are equally effective in this regime. This prompts us to investigate the extent to which other known optimizer and model interventions influence the sensitivity of the final loss to changes in the learning rate. To this end, we study methods such as warm-up, weight decay, and the MuParam (Yang et al., 2022), and combine techniques to train small models that achieve similar losses across orders of magnitude of learning rate variation. Finally, to conclude our exploration we study two cases where instabilities can be predicted before they emerge by examining the scaling behavior of model characteristics such as activation and gradient norms. Mitchell Wortsman, Peter J. Liu, Lechao Xiao, Katie Everett, Alexander A. Alemi, Ben Adlam, John D. Co-Reyes, Izzeddin Gur, Roman Novak, Jeffrey Pennington, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Kelvin Xu, Jaehoon Lee 0001, Justin Gilmer, Simon Kornblith |
ICLR | 10 |
| 2024 | Scaling Exponents Across Parameterizations and OptimizersabstractRobust and effective scaling of models from small to large width typically requires the precise adjustment of many algorithmic and architectural details, such as parameterization and optimizer choices. In this work, we propose a new perspective on parameterization by investigating a key assumption in prior work about the alignment between parameters and data and derive new theoretical results under weaker assumptions and a broader set of optimizers. Our extensive empirical investigation includes *tens of thousands* of models trained with *all combinations of* three optimizers, four parameterizations, several alignment assumptions, more than a dozen learning rates, and fourteen model sizes up to 27B parameters. We find that the best learning rate scaling prescription would often have been excluded by the assumptions in prior work. Our results show that all parameterizations, not just maximal update parameterization (muP), can achieve hyperparameter transfer; moreover, our novel per-layer learning rate prescription for standard parameterization outperforms muP. Finally, we demonstrate that an overlooked aspect of parameterization, the epsilon parameter in Adam, must be scaled correctly to avoid gradient underflow and propose *Adam-atan2*, a new numerically stable, scale-invariant version of Adam that eliminates the epsilon hyperparameter entirely. Katie Everett, Lechao Xiao, Mitchell Wortsman, Alexander A. Alemi, Roman Novak, Peter J. Liu, Izzeddin Gur, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Leslie Pack Kaelbling, Jaehoon Lee 0001, Jeffrey Pennington |
ICML | 5 |
| 2022 | Wide Bayesian neural networks have a simple weight posterior: theory and accelerated samplingabstractWe introduce repriorisation, a data-dependent reparameterisation which transforms a Bayesian neural network (BNN) posterior to a distribution whose KL divergence to the BNN prior vanishes as layer widths grow. The repriorisation map acts directly on parameters, and its analytic simplicity complements the known neural network Gaussian process (NNGP) behaviour of wide BNNs in function space. Exploiting the repriorisation, we develop a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) posterior sampling algorithm which mixes faster the wider the BNN. This contrasts with the typically poor performance of MCMC in high dimensions. We observe up to 50x higher effective sample size relative to no reparametrisation for both fully-connected and residual networks. Improvements are achieved at all widths, with the margin between reparametrised and standard BNNs growing with layer width. Jiri Hron, Roman Novak, Jeffrey Pennington, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein |
ICML | 2 |
| 2022 | Fast Finite Width Neural Tangent KernelabstractThe Neural Tangent Kernel (NTK), defined as the outer product of the neural network (NN) Jacobians, has emerged as a central object of study in deep learning. In the infinite width limit, the NTK can sometimes be computed analytically and is useful for understanding training and generalization of NN architectures. At finite widths, the NTK is also used to better initialize NNs, compare the conditioning across models, perform architecture search, and do meta-learning. Unfortunately, the finite width NTK is notoriously expensive to compute, which severely limits its practical utility. We perform the first in-depth analysis of the compute and memory requirements for NTK computation in finite width networks. Leveraging the structure of neural networks, we further propose two novel algorithms that change the exponent of the compute and memory requirements of the finite width NTK, dramatically improving efficiency. Our algorithms can be applied in a black box fashion to any differentiable function, including those implementing neural networks. We open-source our implementations within the Neural Tangents package at https://github.com/google/neural-tangents. Roman Novak, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Samuel S. Schoenholz |
ICML | 1 |
| 2022 | Fast Neural Kernel Embeddings for General ActivationsabstractInfinite width limit has shed light on generalization and optimization aspects of deep learning by establishing connections between neural networks and kernel methods. Despite their importance, the utility of these kernel methods was limited in large-scale learning settings due to their (super-)quadratic runtime and memory complexities. Moreover, most prior works on neural kernels have focused on the ReLU activation, mainly due to its popularity but also due to the difficulty of computing such kernels for general activations. In this work, we overcome such difficulties by providing methods to work with general activations. First, we compile and expand the list of activation functions admitting exact dual activation expressions to compute neural kernels. When the exact computation is unknown, we present methods to effectively approximate them. We propose a fast sketching method that approximates any multi-layered Neural Network Gaussian Process (NNGP) kernel and Neural Tangent Kernel (NTK) matrices for a wide range of activation functions, going beyond the commonly analyzed ReLU activation. This is done by showing how to approximate the neural kernels using the truncated Hermite expansion of any desired activation functions. While most prior works require data points on the unit sphere, our methods do not suffer from such limitations and are applicable to any dataset of points in $\mathbb{R}^d$. Furthermore, we provide a subspace embedding for NNGP and NTK matrices with near input-sparsity runtime and near-optimal target dimension which applies to any \emph{homogeneous} dual activation functions with rapidly convergent Taylor expansion. Empirically, with respect to exact convolutional NTK (CNTK) computation, our method achieves $106\times$ speedup for approximate CNTK of a 5-layer Myrtle network on CIFAR-10 dataset. Insu Han, Amir Zandieh, Jaehoon Lee 0001, Roman Novak, Lechao Xiao, Amin Karbasi |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2021 | Dataset Distillation with Infinitely Wide Convolutional NetworksabstractThe effectiveness of machine learning algorithms arises from being able to extract useful features from large amounts of data. As model and dataset sizes increase, dataset distillation methods that compress large datasets into significantly smaller yet highly performant ones will become valuable in terms of training efficiency and useful feature extraction. To that end, we apply a novel distributed kernel-based meta-learning framework to achieve state-of-the-art results for dataset distillation using infinitely wide convolutional neural networks. For instance, using only 10 datapoints (0.02% of original dataset), we obtain over 65% test accuracy on CIFAR-10 image classification task, a dramatic improvement over the previous best test accuracy of 40%. Our state-of-the-art results extend across many other settings for MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and SVHN. Furthermore, we perform some preliminary analyses of our distilled datasets to shed light on how they differ from naturally occurring data. Timothy Nguyen, Roman Novak, Lechao Xiao, Jaehoon Lee 0001 |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2020 | Neural Tangents: Fast and Easy Infinite Neural Networks in Python
Roman Novak, Lechao Xiao, Jiri Hron, Jaehoon Lee 0001, Alexander A. Alemi, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Samuel S. Schoenholz |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2020 | Infinite attention: NNGP and NTK for deep attention networksabstractThere is a growing amount of literature on the relationship between wide neural networks (NNs) and Gaussian processes (GPs), identifying an equivalence between the two for a variety of NN architectures. This equivalence enables, for instance, accurate approximation of the behaviour of wide Bayesian NNs without MCMC or variational approximations, or characterisation of the distribution of randomly initialised wide NNs optimised by gradient descent without ever running an optimiser. We provide a rigorous extension of these results to NNs involving attention layers, showing that unlike single-head attention, which induces non-Gaussian behaviour, multi-head attention architectures behave as GPs as the number of heads tends to infinity. We further discuss the effects of positional encodings and layer normalisation, and propose modifications of the attention mechanism which lead to improved results for both finite and infinitely wide NNs. We evaluate attention kernels empirically, leading to a moderate improvement upon the previous state-of-the-art on CIFAR-10 for GPs without trainable kernels and advanced data preprocessing. Finally, we introduce new features to the Neural Tangents library (Novak et al.,2020) allowing applications of NNGP/NTK models, with and without attention, to variable-length sequences, with an example on the IMDb reviews dataset. Jiri Hron, Yasaman Bahri, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Roman Novak |
ICML | 4 |
| 2020 | Finite Versus Infinite Neural Networks: an Empirical StudyabstractWe perform a careful, thorough, and large scale empirical study of the correspondence between wide neural networks and kernel methods. By doing so, we resolve a variety of open questions related to the study of infinitely wide neural networks. Our experimental results include: kernel methods outperform fully-connected finite-width networks, but underperform convolutional finite width networks; neural network Gaussian process (NNGP) kernels frequently outperform neural tangent (NT) kernels; centered and ensembled finite networks have reduced posterior variance and behave more similarly to infinite networks; weight decay and the use of a large learning rate break the correspondence between finite and infinite networks; the NTK parameterization outperforms the standard parameterization for finite width networks; diagonal regularization of kernels acts similarly to early stopping; floating point precision limits kernel performance beyond a critical dataset size; regularized ZCA whitening improves accuracy; finite network performance depends non-monotonically on width in ways not captured by double descent phenomena; equivariance of CNNs is only beneficial for narrow networks far from the kernel regime. Our experiments additionally motivate an improved layer-wise scaling for weight decay which improves generalization in finite-width networks. Finally, we develop improved best practices for using NNGP and NT kernels for prediction, including a novel ensembling technique. Using these best practices we achieve state-of-the-art results on CIFAR-10 classification for kernels corresponding to each architecture class we consider. Jaehoon Lee 0001, Samuel S. Schoenholz, Jeffrey Pennington, Ben Adlam, Lechao Xiao, Roman Novak, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein |
NeurIPS | 6 |
| 2019 | Bayesian Deep Convolutional Networks with Many Channels are Gaussian Processes
Roman Novak, Lechao Xiao, Yasaman Bahri, Jaehoon Lee 0001, Greg Yang, Jiri Hron, Daniel A. Abolafia, Jeffrey Pennington, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein |
ICLR (Poster) | 1 |
| 2019 | Wide Neural Networks of Any Depth Evolve as Linear Models Under Gradient DescentabstractA longstanding goal in deep learning research has been to precisely characterize training and generalization. However, the often complex loss landscapes of neural networks have made a theory of learning dynamics elusive. In this work, we show that for wide neural networks the learning dynamics simplify considerably and that, in the infinite width limit, they are governed by a linear model obtained from the first-order Taylor expansion of the network around its initial parameters. Furthermore, mirroring the correspondence between wide Bayesian neural networks and Gaussian processes, gradient-based training of wide neural networks with a squared loss produces test set predictions drawn from a Gaussian process with a particular compositional kernel. While these theoretical results are only exact in the infinite width limit, we nevertheless find excellent empirical agreement between the predictions of the original network and those of the linearized version even for finite practically-sized networks. This agreement is robust across different architectures, optimization methods, and loss functions. Jaehoon Lee 0001, Lechao Xiao, Samuel S. Schoenholz, Yasaman Bahri, Roman Novak, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Jeffrey Pennington |
NeurIPS | 5 |
| 2018 | Deep Neural Networks as Gaussian Processes
Jaehoon Lee 0001, Yasaman Bahri, Roman Novak, Samuel S. Schoenholz, Jeffrey Pennington, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein |
ICLR (Poster) | 3 |
| 2018 | Sensitivity and Generalization in Neural Networks: an Empirical Study
Roman Novak, Yasaman Bahri, Daniel A. Abolafia, Jeffrey Pennington, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein |
ICLR (Poster) | 1 |
| 2015 | Loop Optimization for Divergence Reduction on GPUs with SIMT ArchitectureabstractThe single-instruction multiple thread (SIMT) architecture that can be found in some latest graphical processing units (GPUs) builds on the conventional single-instruction multiple data (SIMD) parallelism while adopting the thread programming model. The architecture suffers from a degraded performance caused by the inefficient divergence handling, a problem hidden by the programmer's view of independent threads. A loop optimization technique having the potential to increase efficiency of the core SIMD block while processing embedded divergences is investigated here. Concurrent loops are generally not bound to iterate in lock-step, allowing better alignment of thread flows via iteration scheduling. The concept efficiency is analyzed for fixed and flow-adapting scheduling policies. The proposed payoff model captures loop overhead implications, allowing one to assess the tradeoffs of applying the technique to a specific loop instance. Processing speedups can generally be observed in the total running time if kernels are compute-bound, as demonstrated by several examples. The studied iteration scheduling policies do not impose alterations to the core SIMD concept and design, thus preserving the benefits of data level parallelism. Roman Novak |
IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. | 1 |
| 2010 | The impact of network topology on the performance of MAP selection algorithms
Andrej Vilhar, Roman Novak, Gorazd Kandus |
Comput. Networks | 2 |
| 2008 | Policy relationship annotations of predefined AS-level topologies
Andrej Vilhar, Roman Novak |
Comput. Networks | 2 |
| 2003 | Side-Channel Attack on Substitution Blocks
Roman Novak |
ACNS | 1 |
| 1994 | Adaptive Steiner tree balancing in distributed algorithm for multicast connection setup
Roman Novak, Gorazd Kandus |
Microprocess. Microprogramming | 1 |