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

Alessandro Davide Ialongo

dblp:203/8124 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 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
3 papers
Reinforcement learning · 62% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 33% Motion planning and robot control · 5%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
continuous control
1.122022
Evaluating Model-Based Planning and Planner Amortization for Continuous Control · ICLR 2022
Iterative Amortized Policy Optimization · NeurIPS 2021
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
model-based reinforcement learning
0.612022
Evaluating Model-Based Planning and Planner Amortization for Continuous Control · ICLR 2022
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy optimization
0.512021
Iterative Amortized Policy Optimization · NeurIPS 2021
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
gaussian process
0.412019
Overcoming Mean-Field Approximations in Recurrent Gaussian Process Models · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference
mean-field approximation
0.412019
Overcoming Mean-Field Approximations in Recurrent Gaussian Process Models · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference
0.412019
Overcoming Mean-Field Approximations in Recurrent Gaussian Process Models · ICML 2019
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control
robot control
0.212022
Evaluating Model-Based Planning and Planner Amortization for Continuous Control · ICLR 2022

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

variational inference · 0.9planner amortization · 0.6model-based planning · 0.6iterative amortized optimization · 0.5low-rank representation · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Evaluating Model-Based Planning and Planner Amortization for Continuous Control
Arunkumar Byravan, Leonard Hasenclever, Piotr Trochim, Mehdi Mirza, Alessandro Davide Ialongo, Yuval Tassa, Jost Tobias Springenberg, Abbas Abdolmaleki, Nicolas Heess, Josh Merel, Martin A. Riedmiller
ICLR5
2021 Iterative Amortized Policy Optimization
abstract
Policy networks are a central feature of deep reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms for continuous control, enabling the estimation and sampling of high-value actions. From the variational inference perspective on RL, policy networks, when used with entropy or KL regularization, are a form of amortized optimization, optimizing network parameters rather than the policy distributions directly. However, direct amortized mappings can yield suboptimal policy estimates and restricted distributions, limiting performance and exploration. Given this perspective, we consider the more flexible class of iterative amortized optimizers. We demonstrate that the resulting technique, iterative amortized policy optimization, yields performance improvements over direct amortization on benchmark continuous control tasks.
Joseph Marino, Alexandre Piché, Alessandro Davide Ialongo, Yisong Yue
NeurIPS3
2019 Overcoming Mean-Field Approximations in Recurrent Gaussian Process Models
abstract
We identify a new variational inference scheme for dynamical systems whose transition function is modelled by a Gaussian process. Inference in this setting has either employed computationally intensive MCMC methods, or relied on factorisations of the variational posterior. As we demonstrate in our experiments, the factorisation between latent system states and transition function can lead to a miscalibrated posterior and to learning unnecessarily large noise terms. We eliminate this factorisation by explicitly modelling the dependence between state trajectories and the low-rank representation of our Gaussian process posterior. Samples of the latent states can then be tractably generated by conditioning on this representation. The method we obtain gives better predictive performance and more calibrated estimates of the transition function, yet maintains the same time and space complexities as mean-field methods.
Alessandro Davide Ialongo, Mark van der Wilk, James Hensman, Carl E. Rasmussen
ICML1