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

Elke Kirschbaum

dblp:209/4854 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author

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
Trustworthy machine learning · 53% Question answering and dialogue systems · 18% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 12%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
calibration
0.912025
QA-Calibration of Language Model Confidence Scores · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › calibration
confidence calibration
0.912025
QA-Calibration of Language Model Confidence Scores · ICLR 2025
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems › answer generation
generative question answering
0.912025
QA-Calibration of Language Model Confidence Scores · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation
0.912025
QA-Calibration of Language Model Confidence Scores · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
causal inference
0.612022
Causal Inference Through the Structural Causal Marginal Problem · ICML 2022
Bioinformatics and computational biology › neuroscience › neuroinformatics › neural data analysis
calcium imaging analysis
0.412019
LeMoNADe: Learned Motif and Neuronal Assembly Detection in calcium imaging videos · ICLR (Poster) 2019
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning
sparse coding
0.312017
Sparse convolutional coding for neuronal assembly detection · NIPS 2017
Bioinformatics and computational biology › neuroscience › neuroinformatics
neural data analysis
0.312017
Sparse convolutional coding for neuronal assembly detection · NIPS 2017
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › causal reasoning
counterfactual reasoning
0.212022
Causal Inference Through the Structural Causal Marginal Problem · ICML 2022

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

post-hoc calibration · 0.9discretized calibration · 0.9motif detection · 0.8convolutional neural network · 0.8structural causal model · 0.6sparse convolutional coding · 0.6response function · 0.6convolutional sparse coding · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 QA-Calibration of Language Model Confidence Scores
abstract
To use generative question-and-answering (QA) systems for decision-making and in any critical application, these systems need to provide well-calibrated confidence scores that reflect the correctness of their answers. Existing calibration methods aim to ensure that the confidence score is, *on average*, indicative of the likelihood that the answer is correct. We argue, however, that this standard (average-case) notion of calibration is difficult to interpret for decision-making in generative QA. To address this, we generalize the standard notion of average calibration and introduce QA-calibration, which ensures calibration holds across different question-and-answer groups. We then propose discretized posthoc calibration schemes for achieving QA-calibration. We establish distribution-free guarantees on the performance of this method and validate our method on confidence scores returned by elicitation prompts across multiple QA benchmarks and large language models (LLMs).
Putra Manggala, Atalanti-Anastasia Mastakouri, Elke Kirschbaum, Shiva Prasad Kasiviswanathan, Aaditya Ramdas
ICLR3
2022 Obtaining Causal Information by Merging Datasets with MAXENT
abstract
The investigation of the question "which treatment has a causal effect on a target variable?" is of particular relevance in a large number of scientific disciplines. This challenging task becomes even more difficult if not all treatment variables were or even can not be observed jointly with the target variable. In this paper, we discuss how causal knowledge can be obtained without having observed all variables jointly, but by merging the statistical information from different datasets. We show how the maximum entropy principle can be used to identify edges among random variables when assuming causal sufficiency and an extended version of faithfulness, and when only subsets of the variables have been observed jointly.
Sergio Hernan Garrido Mejia, Elke Kirschbaum, Dominik Janzing
AISTATS2
2022 Causal Inference Through the Structural Causal Marginal Problem
abstract
We introduce an approach to counterfactual inference based on merging information from multiple datasets. We consider a causal reformulation of the statistical marginal problem: given a collection of marginal structural causal models (SCMs) over distinct but overlapping sets of variables, determine the set of joint SCMs that are counterfactually consistent with the marginal ones. We formalise this approach for categorical SCMs using the response function formulation and show that it reduces the space of allowed marginal and joint SCMs. Our work thus highlights a new mode of falsifiability through additional variables, in contrast to the statistical one via additional data.
Luigi Gresele, Julius von Kügelgen, Jonas M. Kübler, Elke Kirschbaum, Bernhard Schölkopf, Dominik Janzing
ICML4
2020 DISCo: Deep Learning, Instance Segmentation, and Correlations for Cell Segmentation in Calcium Imaging
Elke Kirschbaum, Alberto Bailoni, Fred A. Hamprecht
MICCAI (5)1
2019 LeMoNADe: Learned Motif and Neuronal Assembly Detection in calcium imaging videos
Elke Kirschbaum, Manuel Haußmann, Steffen Wolf 0001, Hannah Sonntag, Justus Schneider, Shehabeldin Elzoheiry, Oliver Kann, Daniel Durstewitz, Fred A. Hamprecht
ICLR (Poster)1
2017 Sparse convolutional coding for neuronal assembly detection
abstract
Cell assemblies, originally proposed by Donald Hebb (1949), are subsets of neurons firing in a temporally coordinated way that gives rise to repeated motifs supposed to underly neural representations and information processing. Although Hebb's original proposal dates back many decades, the detection of assemblies and their role in coding is still an open and current research topic, partly because simultaneous recordings from large populations of neurons became feasible only relatively recently. Most current and easy-to-apply computational techniques focus on the identification of strictly synchronously spiking neurons. In this paper we propose a new algorithm, based on sparse convolutional coding, for detecting recurrent motifs of arbitrary structure up to a given length. Testing of our algorithm on synthetically generated datasets shows that it outperforms established methods and accurately identifies the temporal structure of embedded assemblies, even when these contain overlapping neurons or when strong background noise is present. Moreover, exploratory analysis of experimental datasets from hippocampal slices and cortical neuron cultures have provided promising results.
Sven Peter, Elke Kirschbaum, Martin Both, Lee Campbell, Brandon Harvey, Conor Heins, Daniel Durstewitz, Ferran Diego, Fred A. Hamprecht
NIPS2