Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Nidham Gazagnadou

dblp:236/5973 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 1 first-author · 2 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
4 papers
Efficient and distributed learning · 57% Optimization for machine learning · 24% Trustworthy machine learning · 12%
Network and information security
2 papers
Privacy and data protection · 100%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Image and video coding · 100%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Mathematical optimization · 100%

Topics — the 16 heaviest of 18, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
federated learning
0.812024
FedP3: Federated Personalized and Privacy-friendly Network Pruning under Model Heterogeneity · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression
0.812024
FedP3: Federated Personalized and Privacy-friendly Network Pruning under Model Heterogeneity · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › federated learning › heterogeneous federated learning
model heterogeneity
0.812024
FedP3: Federated Personalized and Privacy-friendly Network Pruning under Model Heterogeneity · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
pruning
0.812024
FedP3: Federated Personalized and Privacy-friendly Network Pruning under Model Heterogeneity · ICLR 2024
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy
0.812024
FedP3: Federated Personalized and Privacy-friendly Network Pruning under Model Heterogeneity · ICLR 2024
Privacy and data protection › privacy-preserving machine learning
federated learning privacy
0.812024
FedP3: Federated Personalized and Privacy-friendly Network Pruning under Model Heterogeneity · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.712023
Privacy Assessment on Reconstructed Images: Are Existing Evaluation Metrics Faithful to Human Perception? · NeurIPS 2023
Image and video coding
image quality assessment
0.712023
Privacy Assessment on Reconstructed Images: Are Existing Evaluation Metrics Faithful to Human Perception? · NeurIPS 2023
Image and video coding › image quality assessment › perceptual quality metric
perceptual image quality metric
0.712023
Privacy Assessment on Reconstructed Images: Are Existing Evaluation Metrics Faithful to Human Perception? · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › adaptive optimization
adaptive learning rate
0.412019
Optimal Mini-Batch and Step Sizes for SAGA · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Learning theory
empirical risk minimization
0.412019
Towards closing the gap between the theory and practice of SVRG · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › variance reduction
SAGA
0.412019
Optimal Mini-Batch and Step Sizes for SAGA · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › variance reduction
SVRG
0.412019
Optimal Mini-Batch and Step Sizes for SAGA · ICML 2019
Mathematical optimization
stochastic optimization
0.412019
Towards closing the gap between the theory and practice of SVRG · NeurIPS 2019
Mathematical optimization › gradient descent
SVRG
0.412019
Towards closing the gap between the theory and practice of SVRG · NeurIPS 2019
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization
variance reduction
0.412019
Towards closing the gap between the theory and practice of SVRG · NeurIPS 2019

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

triplet loss · 2.0learning-based metric · 2.0human annotation · 2.0network pruning · 1.5differential privacy · 1.5variance reduction · 1.1arbitrary sampling · 0.8minibatching · 0.4mini-batching · 0.4expected smoothness constant · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 FedP3: Federated Personalized and Privacy-friendly Network Pruning under Model Heterogeneity
abstract
The interest in federated learning has surged in recent research due to its unique ability to train a global model using privacy-secured information held locally on each client. This paper pays particular attention to the issue of client-side model heterogeneity, a pervasive challenge in the practical implementation of FL that escalates its complexity. Assuming a scenario where each client possesses varied memory storage, processing capabilities and network bandwidth - a phenomenon referred to as system heterogeneity - there is a pressing need to customize a unique model for each client. In response to this, we present an effective and adaptable federated framework FedP3, representing Federated Personalized and Privacy-friendly network Pruning, tailored for model heterogeneity scenarios. Our proposed methodology can incorporate and adapt well-established techniques to its specific instances. We offer a theoretical interpretation of FedP3 and its locally differential-private variant, DP-FedP3, and theoretically validate their efficiencies.
Kai Yi, Nidham Gazagnadou, Peter Richtárik, Lingjuan Lyu
ICLR2
2023 Privacy Assessment on Reconstructed Images: Are Existing Evaluation Metrics Faithful to Human Perception?
abstract
Hand-crafted image quality metrics, such as PSNR and SSIM, are commonly used to evaluate model privacy risk under reconstruction attacks. Under these metrics, reconstructed images that are determined to resemble the original one generally indicate more privacy leakage. Images determined as overall dissimilar, on the other hand, indicate higher robustness against attack. However, there is no guarantee that these metrics well reflect human opinions, which offers trustworthy judgement for model privacy leakage. In this paper, we comprehensively study the faithfulness of these hand-crafted metrics to human perception of privacy information from the reconstructed images. On 5 datasets ranging from natural images, faces, to fine-grained classes, we use 4 existing attack methods to reconstruct images from many different classification models and, for each reconstructed image, we ask multiple human annotators to assess whether this image is recognizable. Our studies reveal that the hand-crafted metrics only have a weak correlation with the human evaluation of privacy leakage and that even these metrics themselves often contradict each other. These observations suggest risks of current metrics in the community. To address this potential risk, we propose a learning-based measure called SemSim to evaluate the Semantic Similarity between the original and reconstructed images. SemSim is trained with a standard triplet loss, using an original image as an anchor, one of its recognizable reconstructed images as a positive sample, and an unrecognizable one as a negative. By training on human annotations, SemSim exhibits a greater reflection of privacy leakage on the semantic level. We show that SemSim has a significantly higher correlation with human judgment compared with existing metrics. Moreover, this strong correlation generalizes to unseen datasets, models and attack methods. We envision this work as a milestone for image quality evaluation closer to the human level. The project webpage can be accessed at https://sites.google.com/view/semsim.
Xiaoxiao Sun 0002, Nidham Gazagnadou, Vivek Sharma 0001, Lingjuan Lyu, Hongdong Li, Liang Zheng 0001
NeurIPS2
2019 Optimal Mini-Batch and Step Sizes for SAGA
abstract
Recently it has been shown that the step sizes of a family of variance reduced gradient methods called the JacSketch methods depend on the expected smoothness constant. In particular, if this expected smoothness constant could be calculated a priori, then one could safely set much larger step sizes which would result in a much faster convergence rate. We fill in this gap, and provide simple closed form expressions for the expected smoothness constant and careful numerical experiments verifying these bounds. Using these bounds, and since the SAGA algorithm is part of this JacSketch family, we suggest a new standard practice for setting the step and mini-batch sizes for SAGA that are competitive with a numerical grid search. Furthermore, we can now show that the total complexity of the SAGA algorithm decreases linearly in the mini-batch size up to a pre-defined value: the optimal mini-batch size. This is a rare result in the stochastic variance reduced literature, only previously shown for the Katyusha algorithm. Finally we conjecture that this is the case for many other stochastic variance reduced methods and that our bounds and analysis of the expected smoothness constant is key to extending these results.
Nidham Gazagnadou, Robert M. Gower, Joseph Salmon
ICML1
2019 Towards closing the gap between the theory and practice of SVRG
abstract
Amongst the very first variance reduced stochastic methods for solving the empirical risk minimization problem was the SVRG method. SVRG is an inner-outer loop based method, where in the outer loop a reference full gradient is evaluated, after which $m \in \N$ steps of an inner loop are executed where the reference gradient is used to build a variance reduced estimate of the current gradient. The simplicity of the SVRG method and its analysis have lead to multiple extensions and variants for even non-convex optimization. Yet there is a significant gap between the parameter settings that the analysis suggests and what is known to work well in practice. Our first contribution is that we take several steps towards closing this gap. In particular, the current analysis shows that $m$ should be of the order of the condition number so that the resulting method has a favorable complexity. Yet in practice $m=n$ works well regardless of the condition number, where $n$ is the number of data points. Furthermore, the current analysis shows that the inner iterates have to be reset using averaging after every outer loop. Yet in practice SVRG works best when the inner iterates are updated continuously and not reset. We provide an analysis of these aforementioned practical settings and show that they achieve the same favorable complexity as the original analysis (with slightly better constants). Our second contribution is to provide a more general analysis than had been previously done by using arbitrary sampling, which allows us to analyze virtually all forms of mini-batching through a single theorem. Since our setup and analysis reflect what is done in practice, we are able to set the parameters such as the mini-batch size and step size using our theory in such a way that produces a more efficient algorithm in practice, as we show in extensive numerical experiments.
Othmane Sebbouh, Nidham Gazagnadou, Samy Jelassi, Francis R. Bach, Robert M. Gower
NeurIPS2