Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat
dblp:215/5265 · also Uthaipon Tantipongpipat
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2021
0000-0002-5573-5165ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 2Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 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.
| Theoretical computer science
5 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 60% Approximation and online algorithms · 23% Algorithms and data structures · 16% | |
| Network and information security
2 papers |
Privacy and data protection · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
3 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 62% Optimization for machine learning · 30% Efficient and distributed learning · 9% |
Topics — the 26 heaviest of 27, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy |
0.8 | 2 | 2021 | Fast and Memory Efficient Differentially Private-SGD via JL Projections · NeurIPS 2021 Differential Privacy for Growing Databases · NeurIPS 2018 |
Mathematical optimization › experimental design › optimal experimental design
a-optimal design |
0.8 | 2 | 2019 | Proportional Volume Sampling and Approximation Algorithms for A-Optimal Design · SODA 2019 Combinatorial Algorithms for Optimal Design · COLT 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.7 | 2 | 2019 | Multi-Criteria Dimensionality Reduction with Applications to Fairness · NeurIPS 2019 The Price of Fair PCA: One Extra dimension · NeurIPS 2018 |
Algorithms and data structures › numerical linear algebra
dimensionality reduction |
0.7 | 2 | 2019 | Multi-Criteria Dimensionality Reduction with Applications to Fairness · NeurIPS 2019 The Price of Fair PCA: One Extra dimension · NeurIPS 2018 |
Approximation and online algorithms
approximation algorithms |
0.5 | 2 | 2020 | Combinatorial Algorithms for Optimal Design · COLT 2019 Maximizing Determinants under Matroid Constraints · FOCS 2020 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
gradient clipping |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Fast and Memory Efficient Differentially Private-SGD via JL Projections · NeurIPS 2021 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › differentially private deep learning
DP-SGD |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Fast and Memory Efficient Differentially Private-SGD via JL Projections · NeurIPS 2021 |
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization › convex optimization › conic optimization
determinant maximization |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Maximizing Determinants under Matroid Constraints · FOCS 2020 |
Mathematical optimization
discrete optimization |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Maximizing Determinants under Matroid Constraints · FOCS 2020 |
Mathematical optimization › combinatorial optimization
matroid constraint |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Maximizing Determinants under Matroid Constraints · FOCS 2020 |
Mathematical optimization › combinatorial optimization › matroid constraint
matroid optimization |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Maximizing Determinants under Matroid Constraints · FOCS 2020 |
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization
convex optimization |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Combinatorial Algorithms for Optimal Design · COLT 2019 |
Mathematical optimization › experimental design › optimal experimental design
d-optimal design |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Combinatorial Algorithms for Optimal Design · COLT 2019 |
Mathematical optimization
experimental design |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Proportional Volume Sampling and Approximation Algorithms for A-Optimal Design · SODA 2019 |
Approximation and online algorithms › approximation algorithms › combinatorial approximation algorithms
local search approximation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Combinatorial Algorithms for Optimal Design · COLT 2019 |
Approximation and online algorithms › approximation algorithms
network design |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Proportional Volume Sampling and Approximation Algorithms for A-Optimal Design · SODA 2019 |
Mathematical optimization › experimental design
optimal experimental design |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Combinatorial Algorithms for Optimal Design · COLT 2019 |
Approximation and online algorithms › approximation algorithms › network design
survivable network design |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Proportional Volume Sampling and Approximation Algorithms for A-Optimal Design · SODA 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness › fair representation learning
fair dimensionality reduction |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | The Price of Fair PCA: One Extra dimension · NeurIPS 2018 |
Privacy and data protection › privacy-preserving query processing
adaptive query answering |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Differential Privacy for Growing Databases · NeurIPS 2018 |
Privacy and data protection
privacy-preserving data analysis |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Differential Privacy for Growing Databases · NeurIPS 2018 |
Algorithms and data structures › numerical linear algebra › dimensionality reduction
principal component analysis |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | The Price of Fair PCA: One Extra dimension · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
memory-efficient training |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Fast and Memory Efficient Differentially Private-SGD via JL Projections · NeurIPS 2021 |
Mathematical optimization
semidefinite programming |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Multi-Criteria Dimensionality Reduction with Applications to Fairness · NeurIPS 2019 |
Algorithms and data structures
spectral methods |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Proportional Volume Sampling and Approximation Algorithms for A-Optimal Design · SODA 2019 |
Mathematical optimization › linear programming relaxation › rounding
spectral rounding |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Proportional Volume Sampling and Approximation Algorithms for A-Optimal Design · SODA 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
DP-Adam · 1.0randomized rounding · 0.8semidefinite programming · 0.8approximation algorithm · 0.8private multiplicative weights · 0.7johnson–lindenstrauss projection · 0.5johnson-lindenstrauss projection · 0.5log-concave polynomials · 0.4convex programming relaxation · 0.4spectral sparsification · 0.4regret minimization · 0.4local search · 0.4greedy algorithm · 0.4approximation guarantees · 0.4reconstruction error · 0.3polynomial-time algorithm · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Fast and Memory Efficient Differentially Private-SGD via JL ProjectionsabstractDifferentially Private-SGD (DP-SGD) of Abadi et al. and its variations are the only known algorithms for private training of large scale neural networks. This algorithm requires computation of per-sample gradients norms which is extremely slow and memory intensive in practice. In this paper, we present a new framework to design differentially private optimizers called DP-SGD-JL and DP-Adam-JL. Our approach uses Johnson–Lindenstrauss (JL) projections to quickly approximate the per-sample gradient norms without exactly computing them, thus making the training time and memory requirements of our optimizers closer to that of their non-DP versions. Unlike previous attempts to make DP-SGD faster which work only on a subset of network architectures or use compiler techniques, we propose an algorithmic solution which works for any network in a black-box manner which is the main contribution of this paper. To illustrate this, on IMDb dataset, we train a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) to achieve good privacy-vs-accuracy tradeoff, while being significantly faster than DP-SGD and with a similar memory footprint as non-private SGD. Zhiqi Bu, Sivakanth Gopi, Janardhan Kulkarni, Yin Tat Lee, Judy Hanwen Shen, Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat |
NeurIPS | 6 |
| 2021 | Image Cropping on Twitter: Fairness Metrics, their Limitations, and the Importance of Representation, Design, and AgencyabstractTwitter uses machine learning to crop images, where crops are centered around the part predicted to be the most salient. In fall 2020, Twitter users raised concerns that the automated image cropping system on Twitter favored light-skinned over dark-skinned individuals, as well as concerns that the system favored cropping woman's bodies instead of their heads. In order to address these concerns, we conduct an extensive analysis using formalized group fairness metrics. We find systematic disparities in cropping and identify contributing factors, including the fact that the cropping based on the single most salient point can amplify the disparities because of an effect we term argmax bias. However, we demonstrate that formalized fairness metrics and quantitative analysis on their own are insufficient for capturing the risk of representational harm in automatic cropping. We suggest the removal of saliency-based cropping in favor of a solution that better preserves user agency. For developing a new solution that sufficiently address concerns related to representational harm, our critique motivates a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods that include human-centered design. Kyra Yee, Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat, Shubhanshu Mishra |
Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. | 2 |
| 2020 | Maximizing Determinants under Matroid ConstraintsabstractGiven a set of vectors v1, ... , vn∈ Rdand a matroid M=([n],I), we study the problem of finding a basis S of M such that det(Σi∈sviviT) is maximized. This problem appears in a diverse set of areas, such as experimental design, fair allocation of goods, network design, and machine learning. The current best results include an e2k-estimation for any matroid of rank k [8] and a (1+ε)d-approximation for a uniform matroid of rank k ≥ d+[d/(ε)] [30], where the rank k ≥ d denotes the desired size of the optimal set. Our main result is a new approximation algorithm for the general problem with an approximation guarantee that depends only on the dimension d of the vectors, and not on the size k of the output set. In particular, we show an (O(d))d-estimation and an (O(d))d3-approximation for any matroid, giving a significant improvement over prior work when k ≫ d. Our result relies on showing that there exists an optimal solution to a convex programming relaxation for the problem which has sparse support; in particular, no more than O(d2) variables of the solution have fractional values. The sparsity results rely on the interplay between the first order optimality conditions for the convex program and matroid theory. We believe that the techniques introduced to show sparsity of optimal solutions to convex programs will be of independent interest. We also give a new randomized rounding algorithm that crucially exploits the sparsity of solutions to the convex program. To show the approximation guarantee, we utilize recent works on strongly log-concave polynomials [8], [4] and show new relationships between different convex programs [33], [6] studied for the problem. Finally, we show how to use the estimation algorithm to give an efficient deterministic approximation algorithm. Once again, the algorithm crucially relies on sparsity of the fractional solution to guarantee that the approximation factor depends solely on the dimension d. Vivek Madan, Aleksandar Nikolov, Mohit Singh, Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat |
FOCS | 4 |
| 2019 | Combinatorial Algorithms for Optimal DesignabstractIn an optimal design problem, we are given a set of linear experiments $v_1,…,v_n\in \mathbb{R}^d$ and $k \geq d$, and our goal is to select a set or a multiset $S \subseteq [n]$ of size $k$ such that $\Phi((\sum_{i \in S} v_i v_i^\top )^{-1})$ is minimized. When $\Phi(M) = Determinant(M)^{1/d}$, the problem is known as the D-optimal design problem, and when $\Phi(M) = Trace(M)$, it is known as the A-optimal design problem. One of the most common heuristics used in practice to solve these problems is the local search heuristic, also known as the Fedorov’s exchange method (Fedorov, 1972). This is due to its simplicity and its empirical performance (Cook and Nachtrheim, 1980; Miller and Nguyen, 1994; Atkinson et al., 2007). However, despite its wide usage no theoretical bound has been proven for this algorithm. In this paper, we bridge this gap and prove approximation guarantees for the local search algorithms for D-optimal design and A-optimal design problems. We show that the local search algorithms are asymptotically optimal when $\frac{k}{d}$ is large. In addition to this, we also prove similar approximation guarantees for the greedy algorithms for D-optimal design and A-optimal design problems when $\frac{k}{d}$ is large. Vivek Madan, Mohit Singh, Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat, Weijun Xie 0001 |
COLT | 3 |
| 2019 | Multi-Criteria Dimensionality Reduction with Applications to FairnessabstractDimensionality reduction is a classical technique widely used for data analysis. One foundational instantiation is Principal Component Analysis (PCA), which minimizes the average reconstruction error. In this paper, we introduce the multi-criteria dimensionality reduction problem where we are given multiple objectives that need to be optimized simultaneously. As an application, our model captures several fairness criteria for dimensionality reduction such as the Fair-PCA problem introduced by Samadi et al. [NeurIPS18] and the Nash Social Welfare (NSW) problem. In the Fair-PCA problem, the input data is divided into k groups, and the goal is to find a single d-dimensional representation for all groups for which the maximum reconstruction error of any one group is minimized. In NSW the goal is to maximize the product of the individual variances of the groups achieved by the common low-dimensinal space. Our main result is an exact polynomial-time algorithm for the two-criteria dimensionality reduction problem when the two criteria are increasing concave functions. As an application of this result, we obtain a polynomial time algorithm for Fair-PCA for k=2 groups, resolving an open problem of Samadi et al.[NeurIPS18], and a polynomial time algorithm for NSW objective for k=2 groups. We also give approximation algorithms for k>2. Our technical contribution in the above results is to prove new low-rank properties of extreme point solutions to semi-definite programs. We conclude with the results of several experiments indicating improved performance and generalized application of our algorithm on real-world datasets. Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat, Samira Samadi, Mohit Singh, Jamie Morgenstern, Santosh S. Vempala |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2019 | Proportional Volume Sampling and Approximation Algorithms for A-Optimal DesignabstractWe present a spectral approach to design approximation algorithms for network design problems. We observe that the underlying mathematical questions are the spectral rounding problems, which were studied in spectral sparsification and in discrepancy theory. We extend these results to incorporate additional nonnegative linear constraints, and show that they can be used to significantly extend the scope of network design problems that can be solved. Our algorithm for spectral rounding is an iterative randomized rounding algorithm based on the regret minimization framework. In some settings, this provides an alternative spectral algorithm to achieve constant factor approximation for the classical survivable network design problem, and partially answers a question of Bansal about survivable network design with concentration property. We also show many other applications of the spectral rounding results, including weighted experimental design and spectral network design. Aleksandar Nikolov, Mohit Singh, Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat |
SODA | 3 |
| 2018 | Differential Privacy for Growing DatabasesabstractThe large majority of differentially private algorithms focus on the static setting, where queries are made on an unchanging database. This is unsuitable for the myriad applications involving databases that grow over time. To address this gap in the literature, we consider the dynamic setting, in which new data arrive over time. Previous results in this setting have been limited to answering a single non-adaptive query repeatedly as the database grows. In contrast, we provide tools for richer and more adaptive analysis of growing databases. Our first contribution is a novel modification of the private multiplicative weights algorithm, which provides accurate analysis of exponentially many adaptive linear queries (an expressive query class including all counting queries) for a static database. Our modification maintains the accuracy guarantee of the static setting even as the database grows without bound. Our second contribution is a set of general results which show that many other private and accurate algorithms can be immediately extended to the dynamic setting by rerunning them at appropriate points of data growth with minimal loss of accuracy, even when data growth is unbounded. Rachel Cummings, Sara Krehbiel, Kevin A. Lai, Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2018 | The Price of Fair PCA: One Extra dimensionabstractWe investigate whether the standard dimensionality reduction technique of PCA inadvertently produces data representations with different fidelity for two different populations. We show on several real-world data sets, PCA has higher reconstruction error on population A than on B (for example, women versus men or lower- versus higher-educated individuals). This can happen even when the data set has a similar number of samples from A and B. This motivates our study of dimensionality reduction techniques which maintain similar fidelity for A and B. We define the notion of Fair PCA and give a polynomial-time algorithm for finding a low dimensional representation of the data which is nearly-optimal with respect to this measure. Finally, we show on real-world data sets that our algorithm can be used to efficiently generate a fair low dimensional representation of the data. Samira Samadi, Uthaipon Tao Tantipongpipat, Jamie Morgenstern, Mohit Singh, Santosh S. Vempala |
NeurIPS | 2 |