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

George Stein

dblp:220/5541 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as 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 · 3 · 1 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
3 papers
Trustworthy machine learning · 67% Representation and self-supervised learning · 20% Generative modeling · 14%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › privacy
memorization in generative models
0.912025
A Geometric Framework for Understanding Memorization in Generative Models · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
privacy
0.912025
A Geometric Framework for Understanding Memorization in Generative Models · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › privacy
training data memorization
0.912025
A Geometric Framework for Understanding Memorization in Generative Models · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning
self-supervised representation learning
0.812024
Self-supervised Representation Learning from Random Data Projectors · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Generative modeling
generative model evaluation
0.712023
Exposing flaws of generative model evaluation metrics and their unfair treatment of diffusion models · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.712023
Exposing flaws of generative model evaluation metrics and their unfair treatment of diffusion models · NeurIPS 2023

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

manifold hypothesis · 0.9geometric analysis · 0.9random data projections · 0.8psychophysics · 0.7FID · 0.7DINOv2-ViT-L/14 · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 A Geometric Framework for Understanding Memorization in Generative Models
abstract
As deep generative models have progressed, recent work has shown them to be capable of memorizing and reproducing training datapoints when deployed. These findings call into question the usability of generative models, especially in light of the legal and privacy risks brought about by memorization. To better understand this phenomenon, we propose the *manifold memorization hypothesis* (MMH), a geometric framework which leverages the manifold hypothesis into a clear language in which to reason about memorization. We propose to analyze memorization in terms of the relationship between the dimensionalities of $(i)$ the ground truth data manifold and $(ii)$ the manifold learned by the model. This framework provides a formal standard for "how memorized" a datapoint is and systematically categorizes memorized data into two types: memorization driven by overfitting and memorization driven by the underlying data distribution. By analyzing prior work in the context of the MMH, we explain and unify assorted observations in the literature. We empirically validate the MMH using synthetic data and image datasets up to the scale of Stable Diffusion, developing new tools for detecting and preventing generation of memorized samples in the process.
Brendan Leigh Ross, Hamidreza Kamkari, Tongzi Wu, Rasa Hosseinzadeh, Zhaoyan Liu, George Stein, Jesse C. Cresswell, Gabriel Loaiza-Ganem
ICLR6
2024 Self-supervised Representation Learning from Random Data Projectors
abstract
Self-supervised representation learning (SSRL) has advanced considerably by exploiting the transformation invariance assumption under artificially designed data augmentations. While augmentation-based SSRL algorithms push the boundaries of performance in computer vision and natural language processing, they are often not directly applicable to other data modalities, and can conflict with application-specific data augmentation constraints. This paper presents an SSRL approach that can be applied to any data modality and network architecture because it does not rely on augmentations or masking. Specifically, we show that high-quality data representations can be learned by reconstructing random data projections. We evaluate the proposed approach on a wide range of representation learning tasks that span diverse modalities and real-world applications. We show that it outperforms multiple state-of-the-art SSRL baselines. Due to its wide applicability and strong empirical results, we argue that learning from randomness is a fruitful research direction worthy of attention and further study.
Yi Sui 0001, Tongzi Wu, Jesse C. Cresswell, Ga Wu, George Stein, Xiao Shi Huang, Maksims Volkovs
ICLR5
2023 Exposing flaws of generative model evaluation metrics and their unfair treatment of diffusion models
abstract
We systematically study a wide variety of generative models spanning semantically-diverse image datasets to understand and improve the feature extractors and metrics used to evaluate them. Using best practices in psychophysics, we measure human perception of image realism for generated samples by conducting the largest experiment evaluating generative models to date, and find that no existing metric strongly correlates with human evaluations. Comparing to 17 modern metrics for evaluating the overall performance, fidelity, diversity, rarity, and memorization of generative models, we find that the state-of-the-art perceptual realism of diffusion models as judged by humans is not reflected in commonly reported metrics such as FID. This discrepancy is not explained by diversity in generated samples, though one cause is over-reliance on Inception-V3. We address these flaws through a study of alternative self-supervised feature extractors, find that the semantic information encoded by individual networks strongly depends on their training procedure, and show that DINOv2-ViT-L/14 allows for much richer evaluation of generative models. Next, we investigate data memorization, and find that generative models do memorize training examples on simple, smaller datasets like CIFAR10, but not necessarily on more complex datasets like ImageNet. However, our experiments show that current metrics do not properly detect memorization: none in the literature is able to separate memorization from other phenomena such as underfitting or mode shrinkage. To facilitate further development of generative models and their evaluation we release all generated image datasets, human evaluation data, and a modular library to compute 17 common metrics for 9 different encoders at https://github.com/layer6ai-labs/dgm-eval.
George Stein, Jesse C. Cresswell, Rasa Hosseinzadeh, Yi Sui 0001, Brendan Leigh Ross, Valentin Villecroze, Zhaoyan Liu, Anthony L. Caterini, J. Eric T. Taylor, Gabriel Loaiza-Ganem
NeurIPS1