Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Masahito Ueda
dblp:16/10162
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
0as first author
7since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-5367-1436ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 9 · 7 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
8 papers |
Optimization for machine learning · 43% Deep learning architectures and training · 24% Reinforcement learning · 15% |
Topics — the 13 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent |
2.2 | 4 | 2022 | Power-Law Escape Rate of SGD · ICML 2022 SGD Can Converge to Local Maxima · ICLR 2022 Strength of Minibatch Noise in SGD · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
loss landscape |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | What shapes the loss landscape of self supervised learning? · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
optimization landscape |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | What shapes the loss landscape of self supervised learning? · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › deep reinforcement learning
deep q-learning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Convergent and Efficient Deep Q Learning Algorithm · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
sample efficiency |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Convergent and Efficient Deep Q Learning Algorithm · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stationary distribution |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Noise and Fluctuation of Finite Learning Rate Stochastic Gradient Descent · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
activation function |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Neural Networks Fail to Learn Periodic Functions and How to Fix It · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization
extrapolation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Neural Networks Fail to Learn Periodic Functions and How to Fix It · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › activation function
periodic activation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Neural Networks Fail to Learn Periodic Functions and How to Fix It · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
loss function design |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Deep Gamblers: Learning to Abstain with Portfolio Theory · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation
selective classification |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Deep Gamblers: Learning to Abstain with Portfolio Theory · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Deep Gamblers: Learning to Abstain with Portfolio Theory · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
implicit bias |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Power-Law Escape Rate of SGD · ICML 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
stochastic gradient descent · 1.1stochastic differential equation · 0.6random time change · 0.6deep q-learning · 0.6discrete-time dynamics · 0.5bayesian inference · 0.5sinusoidal activation · 0.4portfolio theory · 0.4doubling rate · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Symbolic equation solving via reinforcement learningabstractMachine-learning methods are rapidly being adopted in a wide variety of social, economic, and scientific contexts, yet they are notorious for struggling with exact mathematics. A typical example is computer algebra, which includes tasks like simplifying mathematical terms, calculating formal derivatives, or finding exact solutions of algebraic equations. Traditional software packages for these purposes are commonly based on a huge database of rules for how a specific operation (e.g., differentiation) transforms a certain term (e.g., sine function) into another one (e.g., cosine function). These rules have usually needed to be discovered and subsequently programmed by humans. Efforts to automate this process by machine-learning approaches are faced with challenges like the singular nature of solutions to mathematical problems, when approximations are unacceptable, as well as hallucination effects leading to flawed reasoning. We propose a novel deep-learning interface involving a reinforcement-learning agent that operates a symbolic stack calculator to explore mathematical relations. By construction, this system is capable of exact transformations and immune to hallucination. Using the paradigmatic example of solving linear equations in symbolic form, we demonstrate how our reinforcement-learning agent autonomously discovers elementary transformation rules and step-by-step solutions. • A machine learning platform for exact mathematics without hallucination is developed. • A reinforcement-learning agent learns autonomously how to solve algebraic equations symbolically. • The learned strategies result in easily comprehensible step-by-step.solutions. Lennart Dabelow, Masahito Ueda |
Neurocomputing | 2 |
| 2023 | What shapes the loss landscape of self supervised learning?
Liu Ziyin 0001, Ekdeep Singh Lubana, Masahito Ueda, Hidenori Tanaka |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2022 | Strength of Minibatch Noise in SGD
Liu Ziyin 0001, Kangqiao Liu, Takashi Mori, Masahito Ueda |
ICLR | 4 |
| 2022 | SGD Can Converge to Local Maxima
Liu Ziyin 0001, Botao Li, James B. Simon, Masahito Ueda |
ICLR | 4 |
| 2022 | Convergent and Efficient Deep Q Learning Algorithm
Zhikang Wang, Masahito Ueda |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2022 | Power-Law Escape Rate of SGDabstractStochastic gradient descent (SGD) undergoes complicated multiplicative noise for the mean-square loss. We use this property of SGD noise to derive a stochastic differential equation (SDE) with simpler additive noise by performing a random time change. Using this formalism, we show that the log loss barrier $\Delta\log L=\log[L(\theta^s)/L(\theta^*)]$ between a local minimum $\theta^*$ and a saddle $\theta^s$ determines the escape rate of SGD from the local minimum, contrary to the previous results borrowing from physics that the linear loss barrier $\Delta L=L(\theta^s)-L(\theta^*)$ decides the escape rate. Our escape-rate formula strongly depends on the typical magnitude $h^*$ and the number $n$ of the outlier eigenvalues of the Hessian. This result explains an empirical fact that SGD prefers flat minima with low effective dimensions, giving an insight into implicit biases of SGD. Takashi Mori, Liu Ziyin 0001, Kangqiao Liu, Masahito Ueda |
ICML | 4 |
| 2021 | Noise and Fluctuation of Finite Learning Rate Stochastic Gradient DescentabstractIn the vanishing learning rate regime, stochastic gradient descent (SGD) is now relatively well understood. In this work, we propose to study the basic properties of SGD and its variants in the non-vanishing learning rate regime. The focus is on deriving exactly solvable results and discussing their implications. The main contributions of this work are to derive the stationary distribution for discrete-time SGD in a quadratic loss function with and without momentum; in particular, one implication of our result is that the fluctuation caused by discrete-time dynamics takes a distorted shape and is dramatically larger than a continuous-time theory could predict. Examples of applications of the proposed theory considered in this work include the approximation error of variants of SGD, the effect of minibatch noise, the optimal Bayesian inference, the escape rate from a sharp minimum, and the stationary covariance of a few second-order methods including damped Newton’s method, natural gradient descent, and Adam. Kangqiao Liu, Liu Ziyin 0001, Masahito Ueda |
ICML | 3 |
| 2020 | Neural Networks Fail to Learn Periodic Functions and How to Fix ItabstractPrevious literature offers limited clues on how to learn a periodic function using modern neural networks. We start with a study of the extrapolation properties of neural networks; we prove and demonstrate experimentally that the standard activations functions, such as ReLU, tanh, sigmoid, along with their variants, all fail to learn to extrapolate simple periodic functions. We hypothesize that this is due to their lack of a ``periodic" inductive bias. As a fix of this problem, we propose a new activation, namely, $x + \sin^2(x)$, which achieves the desired periodic inductive bias to learn a periodic function while maintaining a favorable optimization property of the $\relu$-based activations. Experimentally, we apply the proposed method to temperature and financial data prediction. Liu Ziyin 0001, Tilman Hartwig, Masahito Ueda |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2019 | Deep Gamblers: Learning to Abstain with Portfolio TheoryabstractWe deal with the selective classification problem (supervised-learning problem with a rejection option), where we want to achieve the best performance at a certain level of coverage of the data. We transform the original $m$-class classification problem to (m+1)-class where the (m+1)-th class represents the model abstaining from making a prediction due to disconfidence. Inspired by portfolio theory, we propose a loss function for the selective classification problem based on the doubling rate of gambling. Minimizing this loss function corresponds naturally to maximizing the return of a horse race, where a player aims to balance between betting on an outcome (making a prediction) when confident and reserving one's winnings (abstaining) when not confident. This loss function allows us to train neural networks and characterize the disconfidence of prediction in an end-to-end fashion. In comparison with previous methods, our method requires almost no modification to the model inference algorithm or model architecture. Experiments show that our method can identify uncertainty in data points, and achieves strong results on SVHN and CIFAR10 at various coverages of the data. Liu Ziyin 0001, Zhikang Wang, Paul Pu Liang, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, Louis-Philippe Morency, Masahito Ueda |
NeurIPS | 6 |