Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Bibaswan K. Chatterjee
dblp:178/3235
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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 |
Learning paradigms · 28% Graph learning · 28% Deep learning architectures and training · 28% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning paradigms › semi-supervised learning › graph-based semi-supervised learning
graph transduction |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Graph learning
network embedding |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › regularization
spectral regularization |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015 |
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization
convex optimization |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015 |
Mathematical optimization › convex relaxation
semidefinite relaxation |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization bounds |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
PAC learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph Transduction · NIPS 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
subgradient method · 0.4inexact proximal method · 0.4FISTA · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | Spectral Norm Regularization of Orthonormal Representations for Graph TransductionabstractRecent literature~\cite{ando} suggests that embedding a graph on an unit sphere leads to better generalization for graph transduction. However, the choice of optimal embedding and an efficient algorithm to compute the same remains open. In this paper, we show that orthonormal representations, a class of unit-sphere graph embeddings are PAC learnable. Existing PAC-based analysis do not apply as the VC dimension of the function class is infinite. We propose an alternative PAC-based bound, which do not depend on the VC dimension of the underlying function class, but is related to the famous Lov\'{a}sz~$\vartheta$ function. The main contribution of the paper is SPORE, a SPectral regularized ORthonormal Embedding for graph transduction, derived from the PAC bound. SPORE is posed as a non-smooth convex function over an \emph{elliptope}. These problems are usually solved as semi-definite programs (SDPs) with time complexity $O(n^6)$. We present, Infeasible Inexact proximal~(IIP): an Inexact proximal method which performs subgradient procedure on an approximate projection, not necessarily feasible. IIP is more scalable than SDP, has an $O(\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}})$ convergence, and is generally applicable whenever a suitable approximate projection is available. We use IIP to compute SPORE where the approximate projection step is computed by FISTA, an accelerated gradient descent procedure. We show that the method has a convergence rate of $O(\frac{1}{\sqrt{T}})$. The proposed algorithm easily scales to 1000's of vertices, while the standard SDP computation does not scale beyond few hundred vertices. Furthermore, the analysis presented here easily extends to the multiple graph setting. Rakesh Shivanna, Bibaswan K. Chatterjee, Raman Sankaran, Chiranjib Bhattacharyya, Francis R. Bach |
NIPS | 2 |