VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Conor Durkan
dblp:230/4513
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
3as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 3 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
5 papers |
Generative modeling · 54% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 46% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model |
1.2 | 2 | 2023 | Reduce, Reuse, Recycle: Compositional Generation with Energy-Based Diffusion Models and MCMC · ICML 2023 Maximum Likelihood Training of Score-Based Diffusion Models · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
density estimation |
0.8 | 2 | 2019 | Neural Spline Flows · NeurIPS 2019 Autoregressive Energy Machines · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model › controllable generation
compositional generation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Reduce, Reuse, Recycle: Compositional Generation with Energy-Based Diffusion Models and MCMC · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
markov chain monte carlo |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Reduce, Reuse, Recycle: Compositional Generation with Energy-Based Diffusion Models and MCMC · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › density estimation
neural density estimation |
0.5 | 2 | 2020 | Autoregressive Energy Machines · ICML 2019 On Contrastive Learning for Likelihood-free Inference · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
maximum likelihood learning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Maximum Likelihood Training of Score-Based Diffusion Models · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model
score-based generative model |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Maximum Likelihood Training of Score-Based Diffusion Models · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
score matching |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Maximum Likelihood Training of Score-Based Diffusion Models · NeurIPS 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 › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › approximate bayesian inference
simulation-based inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | On Contrastive Learning for Likelihood-free Inference · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
energy-based model |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Autoregressive Energy Machines · ICML 2019 |
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
normalizing flow |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Neural Spline Flows · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › parameter estimation
likelihood estimation |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Maximum Likelihood Training of Score-Based Diffusion Models · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference
partition function estimation |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Autoregressive Energy Machines · ICML 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
score-based modeling · 0.7metropolis correction · 0.7markov chain monte carlo · 0.7score matching · 0.5continuous normalizing flow · 0.5neural density estimator · 0.4contrastive learning · 0.4classifier · 0.4importance sampling · 0.4autoregressive decomposition · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Reduce, Reuse, Recycle: Compositional Generation with Energy-Based Diffusion Models and MCMCabstractSince their introduction, diffusion models have quickly become the prevailing approach to generative modeling in many domains. They can be interpreted as learning the gradients of a time-varying sequence of log-probability density functions. This interpretation has motivated classifier-based and classifier-free guidance as methods for post-hoc control of diffusion models. In this work, we build upon these ideas using the score-based interpretation of diffusion models, and explore alternative ways to condition, modify, and reuse diffusion models for tasks involving compositional generation and guidance. In particular, we investigate why certain types of composition fail using current techniques and present a number of solutions. We conclude that the sampler (not the model) is responsible for this failure and propose new samplers, inspired by MCMC, which enable successful compositional generation. Further, we propose an energy-based parameterization of diffusion models which enables the use of new compositional operators and more sophisticated, Metropolis-corrected samplers. Intriguingly we find these samplers lead to notable improvements in compositional generation across a wide variety of problems such as classifier-guided ImageNet modeling and compositional text-to-image generation. Yilun Du, Conor Durkan, Robin Strudel, Josh Tenenbaum, Sander Dieleman, Rob Fergus, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Arnaud Doucet, Will Grathwohl |
ICML | 2 |
| 2021 | Maximum Likelihood Training of Score-Based Diffusion ModelsabstractScore-based diffusion models synthesize samples by reversing a stochastic process that diffuses data to noise, and are trained by minimizing a weighted combination of score matching losses. The log-likelihood of score-based diffusion models can be tractably computed through a connection to continuous normalizing flows, but log-likelihood is not directly optimized by the weighted combination of score matching losses. We show that for a specific weighting scheme, the objective upper bounds the negative log-likelihood, thus enabling approximate maximum likelihood training of score-based diffusion models. We empirically observe that maximum likelihood training consistently improves the likelihood of score-based diffusion models across multiple datasets, stochastic processes, and model architectures. Our best models achieve negative log-likelihoods of 2.83 and 3.76 bits/dim on CIFAR-10 and ImageNet $32\times 32$ without any data augmentation, on a par with state-of-the-art autoregressive models on these tasks. Yang Song 0011, Conor Durkan, Iain Murray 0001, Stefano Ermon |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 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 | 1 |
| 2019 | Autoregressive Energy MachinesabstractNeural density estimators are flexible families of parametric models which have seen widespread use in unsupervised machine learning in recent years. Maximum-likelihood training typically dictates that these models be constrained to specify an explicit density. However, this limitation can be overcome by instead using a neural network to specify an energy function, or unnormalized density, which can subsequently be normalized to obtain a valid distribution. The challenge with this approach lies in accurately estimating the normalizing constant of the high-dimensional energy function. We propose the Autoregressive Energy Machine, an energy-based model which simultaneously learns an unnormalized density and computes an importance-sampling estimate of the normalizing constant for each conditional in an autoregressive decomposition. The Autoregressive Energy Machine achieves state-of-the-art performance on a suite of density-estimation tasks. Conor Durkan, Charlie Nash |
ICML | 1 |
| 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 | 1 |