VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
George Papamakarios
dblp:169/9771
· DBLP profile ↗
10ranked-venue papers
4as first author
3since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 10 · 4 first-author · 3 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
9 papers |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 45% Generative modeling · 29% Deep learning architectures and training · 9% |
Topics — the 24 heaviest of 25, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Generative modeling
normalizing flow |
1.6 | 4 | 2021 | Normalizing Flows for Probabilistic Modeling and Inference · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021 Normalizing Flows on Tori and Spheres · ICML 2020 Neural Spline Flows · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › approximate bayesian inference
simulation-based inference |
1.3 | 3 | 2023 | Compositional Score Modeling for Simulation-Based Inference · ICML 2023 On Contrastive Learning for Likelihood-free Inference · ICML 2020 Fast ε-free Inference of Simulation Models with Bayesian Conditional Density Estimation · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
density estimation |
0.9 | 3 | 2019 | Neural Spline Flows · NeurIPS 2019 Masked Autoregressive Flow for Density Estimation · NIPS 2017 Fast ε-free Inference of Simulation Models with Bayesian Conditional Density Estimation · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › approximate bayesian inference › simulation-based inference
neural posterior estimation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Compositional Score Modeling for Simulation-Based Inference · ICML 2023 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › language modeling
character-level language modeling |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Lipschitz Constant of Self-Attention · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph neural network
expressive power |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Normalizing Flows for Probabilistic Modeling and Inference · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
lipschitz constant |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Lipschitz Constant of Self-Attention · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Lipschitz Constant of Self-Attention · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › attention mechanism
self-attention |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Lipschitz Constant of Self-Attention · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The Lipschitz Constant of Self-Attention · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › density estimation
density ratio estimation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | On Contrastive Learning for Likelihood-free Inference · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › normalizing flow
normalizing flows on manifolds |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Normalizing Flows on Tori and Spheres · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › density estimation
flow-based density estimation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Neural Spline Flows · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
variational autoencoder |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Temporal Difference Variational Auto-Encoder · ICLR 2019 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › normalizing flow
autoregressive flow |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Masked Autoregressive Flow for Density Estimation · NIPS 2017 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
autoregressive model |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Masked Autoregressive Flow for Density Estimation · NIPS 2017 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › approximate bayesian inference
approximate bayesian computation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Fast ε-free Inference of Simulation Models with Bayesian Conditional Density Estimation · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
bayesian inference |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Fast ε-free Inference of Simulation Models with Bayesian Conditional Density Estimation · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › density estimation
conditional density estimation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Fast ε-free Inference of Simulation Models with Bayesian Conditional Density Estimation · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Compositional Score Modeling for Simulation-Based Inference · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
score-based model |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Compositional Score Modeling for Simulation-Based Inference · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference
approximate inference |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Normalizing Flows for Probabilistic Modeling and Inference · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › density estimation
neural density estimation |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | On Contrastive Learning for Likelihood-free Inference · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
posterior inference |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | Fast ε-free Inference of Simulation Models with Bayesian Conditional Density Estimation · NIPS 2016 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
normalizing flow · 0.7score composition · 0.7conditional score modeling · 0.7probability transformations · 0.5l2 self-attention · 0.5invertible neural network · 0.5bijective transformations · 0.5neural density estimator · 0.4contrastive learning · 0.4classifier · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Compositional Score Modeling for Simulation-Based InferenceabstractNeural Posterior Estimation methods for simulation-based inference can be ill-suited for dealing with posterior distributions obtained by conditioning on multiple observations, as they tend to require a large number of simulator calls to learn accurate approximations. In contrast, Neural Likelihood Estimation methods can handle multiple observations at inference time after learning from individual observations, but they rely on standard inference methods, such as MCMC or variational inference, which come with certain performance drawbacks. We introduce a new method based on conditional score modeling that enjoys the benefits of both approaches. We model the scores of the (diffused) posterior distributions induced by individual observations, and introduce a way of combining the learned scores to approximately sample from the target posterior distribution. Our approach is sample-efficient, can naturally aggregate multiple observations at inference time, and avoids the drawbacks of standard inference methods. Tomas Geffner, George Papamakarios, Andriy Mnih |
ICML | 2 |
| 2021 | The Lipschitz Constant of Self-AttentionabstractLipschitz constants of neural networks have been explored in various contexts in deep learning, such as provable adversarial robustness, estimating Wasserstein distance, stabilising training of GANs, and formulating invertible neural networks. Such works have focused on bounding the Lipschitz constant of fully connected or convolutional networks, composed of linear maps and pointwise non-linearities. In this paper, we investigate the Lipschitz constant of self-attention, a non-linear neural network module widely used in sequence modelling. We prove that the standard dot-product self-attention is not Lipschitz for unbounded input domain, and propose an alternative L2 self-attention that is Lipschitz. We derive an upper bound on the Lipschitz constant of L2 self-attention and provide empirical evidence for its asymptotic tightness. To demonstrate the practical relevance of our theoretical work, we formulate invertible self-attention and use it in a Transformer-based architecture for a character-level language modelling task. Hyunjik Kim, George Papamakarios, Andriy Mnih |
ICML | 2 |
| 2021 | Normalizing Flows for Probabilistic Modeling and InferenceabstractNormalizing flows provide a general mechanism for defining expressive probability distributions, only requiring the specification of a (usually simple) base distribution and a series of bijective transformations. There has been much recent work on normalizing flows, ranging from improving their expressive power to expanding their application. We believe the field has now matured and is in need of a unified perspective. In this review, we attempt to provide such a perspective by describing flows through the lens of probabilistic modeling and inference. We place special emphasis on the fundamental principles of flow design, and discuss foundational topics such as expressive power and computational trade-offs. We also broaden the conceptual framing of flows by relating them to more general probability transformations. Lastly, we summarize the use of flows for tasks such as generative modeling, approximate inference, and supervised learning. George Papamakarios, Eric T. Nalisnick, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, Shakir Mohamed, Balaji Lakshminarayanan |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 1 |
| 2020 | On Contrastive Learning for Likelihood-free InferenceabstractLikelihood-free methods perform parameter inference in stochastic simulator models where evaluating the likelihood is intractable but sampling synthetic data is possible. One class of methods for this likelihood-free problem uses a classifier to distinguish between pairs of parameter-observation samples generated using the simulator and pairs sampled from some reference distribution, which implicitly learns a density ratio proportional to the likelihood. Another popular class of methods fits a conditional distribution to the parameter posterior directly, and a particular recent variant allows for the use of flexible neural density estimators for this task. In this work, we show that both of these approaches can be unified under a general contrastive learning scheme, and clarify how they should be run and compared. Conor Durkan, Iain Murray 0001, George Papamakarios |
ICML | 3 |
| 2020 | Normalizing Flows on Tori and SpheresabstractNormalizing flows are a powerful tool for building expressive distributions in high dimensions. So far, most of the literature has concentrated on learning flows on Euclidean spaces. Some problems however, such as those involving angles, are defined on spaces with more complex geometries, such as tori or spheres. In this paper, we propose and compare expressive and numerically stable flows on such spaces. Our flows are built recursively on the dimension of the space, starting from flows on circles, closed intervals or spheres. Danilo Jimenez Rezende, George Papamakarios, Sébastien Racanière, Michael S. Albergo, Gurtej Kanwar, Phiala E. Shanahan, Kyle Cranmer |
ICML | 2 |
| 2019 | Sequential Neural Likelihood: Fast Likelihood-free Inference with Autoregressive FlowsabstractWe present Sequential Neural Likelihood (SNL), a new method for Bayesian inference in simulator models, where the likelihood is intractable but simulating data from the model is possible. SNL trains an autoregressive flow on simulated data in order to learn a model of the likelihood in the region of high posterior density. A sequential training procedure guides simulations and reduces simulation cost by orders of magnitude. We show that SNL is more robust, more accurate and requires less tuning than related neural-based methods, and we discuss diagnostics for assessing calibration, convergence and goodness-of-fit. George Papamakarios, David C. Sterratt, Iain Murray 0001 |
AISTATS | 1 |
| 2019 | Temporal Difference Variational Auto-Encoder
Karol Gregor, George Papamakarios, Frederic Besse, Lars Buesing, Theophane Weber |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2019 | Neural Spline FlowsabstractA normalizing flow models a complex probability density as an invertible transformation of a simple base density. Flows based on either coupling or autoregressive transforms both offer exact density evaluation and sampling, but rely on the parameterization of an easily invertible elementwise transformation, whose choice determines the flexibility of these models. Building upon recent work, we propose a fully-differentiable module based on monotonic rational-quadratic splines, which enhances the flexibility of both coupling and autoregressive transforms while retaining analytic invertibility. We demonstrate that neural spline flows improve density estimation, variational inference, and generative modeling of images. Conor Durkan, Artur Bekasov, Iain Murray 0001, George Papamakarios |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2017 | Masked Autoregressive Flow for Density EstimationabstractAutoregressive models are among the best performing neural density estimators. We describe an approach for increasing the flexibility of an autoregressive model, based on modelling the random numbers that the model uses internally when generating data. By constructing a stack of autoregressive models, each modelling the random numbers of the next model in the stack, we obtain a type of normalizing flow suitable for density estimation, which we call Masked Autoregressive Flow. This type of flow is closely related to Inverse Autoregressive Flow and is a generalization of Real NVP. Masked Autoregressive Flow achieves state-of-the-art performance in a range of general-purpose density estimation tasks. George Papamakarios, Iain Murray 0001, Theo Pavlakou |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2016 | Fast ε-free Inference of Simulation Models with Bayesian Conditional Density EstimationabstractMany statistical models can be simulated forwards but have intractable likelihoods. Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) methods are used to infer properties of these models from data. Traditionally these methods approximate the posterior over parameters by conditioning on data being inside an ε-ball around the observed data, which is only correct in the limit ε→0. Monte Carlo methods can then draw samples from the approximate posterior to approximate predictions or error bars on parameters. These algorithms critically slow down as ε→0, and in practice draw samples from a broader distribution than the posterior. We propose a new approach to likelihood-free inference based on Bayesian conditional density estimation. Preliminary inferences based on limited simulation data are used to guide later simulations. In some cases, learning an accurate parametric representation of the entire true posterior distribution requires fewer model simulations than Monte Carlo ABC methods need to produce a single sample from an approximate posterior. George Papamakarios, Iain Murray 0001 |
NIPS | 1 |