VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Alexander B. Wiltschko
dblp:209/9851
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3
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
2 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 51% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 22% Graph learning · 17% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Compilers and program optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › explanation evaluation
attribution evaluation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Evaluating Attribution for Graph Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
attribution methods |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Evaluating Attribution for Graph Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph neural network |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Evaluating Attribution for Graph Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Evaluating Attribution for Graph Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2020 |
Compilers and program optimization
automatic differentiation |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Tangent: Automatic differentiation using source-code transformation for dynamically typed array programming · NeurIPS 2018 |
Compilers and program optimization › program transformation
source-to-source transformation |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Tangent: Automatic differentiation using source-code transformation for dynamically typed array programming · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
graphical models |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Composing graphical models with neural networks for structured representations and fast inference · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
structured representation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Composing graphical models with neural networks for structured representations and fast inference · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Composing graphical models with neural networks for structured representations and fast inference · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
latent variable model |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | Composing graphical models with neural networks for structured representations and fast inference · NIPS 2016 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
benchmarking · 0.4source code transformation · 0.3gradient surgery · 0.3stochastic variational inference · 0.2recognition networks · 0.2message passing · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | Evaluating Attribution for Graph Neural NetworksabstractInterpretability of machine learning models is critical to scientific understanding, AI safety, as well as debugging. Attribution is one approach to interpretability, which highlights input dimensions that are influential to a neural network’s prediction. Evaluation of these methods is largely qualitative for image and text models, because acquiring ground truth attributions requires expensive and unreliable human judgment. Attribution has been little studied for graph neural networks (GNNs), a model class of growing importance that makes predictions on arbitrarily-sized graphs. In this work we adapt commonly-used attribution methods for GNNs and quantitatively evaluate them using computable ground-truths that are objective and challenging to learn. We make concrete recommendations for which attribution methods to use, and provide the data and code for our benchmarking suite. Rigorous and open source benchmarking of attribution methods in graphs could enable new methods development and broader use of attribution in real-world ML tasks. Benjamín Sánchez-Lengeling, Jennifer N. Wei, Brian K. Lee, Emily Reif, Wesley Wei Qian, Kevin McCloskey, Lucy J. Colwell, Alexander B. Wiltschko |
NeurIPS | 9 |
| 2018 | Tangent: Automatic differentiation using source-code transformation for dynamically typed array programmingabstractThe need to efficiently calculate first- and higher-order derivatives of increasingly complex models expressed in Python has stressed or exceeded the capabilities of available tools. In this work, we explore techniques from the field of automatic differentiation (AD) that can give researchers expressive power, performance and strong usability. These include source-code transformation (SCT), flexible gradient surgery, efficient in-place array operations, and higher-order derivatives. We implement and demonstrate these ideas in the Tangent software library for Python, the first AD framework for a dynamic language that uses SCT. Bart van Merrienboer, Dan Moldovan, Alexander B. Wiltschko |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2016 | Composing graphical models with neural networks for structured representations and fast inferenceabstractWe propose a general modeling and inference framework that combines the complementary strengths of probabilistic graphical models and deep learning methods. Our model family composes latent graphical models with neural network observation likelihoods. For inference, we use recognition networks to produce local evidence potentials, then combine them with the model distribution using efficient message-passing algorithms. All components are trained simultaneously with a single stochastic variational inference objective. We illustrate this framework by automatically segmenting and categorizing mouse behavior from raw depth video, and demonstrate several other example models. Matthew J. Johnson 0002, David Duvenaud, Alexander B. Wiltschko, Ryan P. Adams, Sandeep R. Datta |
NIPS | 3 |