Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Aude Sportisse
dblp:232/4208
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 first-author · 1 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 |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 42% Optimization for machine learning · 19% Representation and self-supervised learning · 19% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Recommender systems · 50% Data integration and cleaning · 50% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › missing data
missing not at random |
1.1 | 2 | 2023 | Are labels informative in semi-supervised learning? Estimating and leveraging the missing-data mechanism · ICML 2023 Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › dataset bias
label bias |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Are labels informative in semi-supervised learning? Estimating and leveraging the missing-data mechanism · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
semi-supervised learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Are labels informative in semi-supervised learning? Estimating and leveraging the missing-data mechanism · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
convergence analysis |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Debiasing Averaged Stochastic Gradient Descent to handle missing values · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › convergence analysis
finite-sample convergence rates |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Debiasing Averaged Stochastic Gradient Descent to handle missing values · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › causal representation learning
identifiability |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
latent variable model |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
matrix factorization |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
missing data |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Debiasing Averaged Stochastic Gradient Descent to handle missing values · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › missing data
missing data imputation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
parameter estimation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › dimensionality reduction
probabilistic principal component analysis |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Debiasing Averaged Stochastic Gradient Descent to handle missing values · NeurIPS 2020 |
Recommender systems
collaborative filtering |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Data integration and cleaning
missing data |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random Data · NeurIPS 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
method of moments · 0.9low-rank model · 0.9likelihood ratio test · 0.7inverse propensity weighting · 0.7debiasing · 0.4averaged stochastic gradient descent · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Are labels informative in semi-supervised learning? Estimating and leveraging the missing-data mechanismabstractSemi-supervised learning is a powerful technique for leveraging unlabeled data to improve machine learning models, but it can be affected by the presence of “informative" labels, which occur when some classes are more likely to be labeled than others. In the missing data literature, such labels are called missing not at random. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to address this issue by estimating the missing-data mechanism and using inverse propensity weighting to debias any SSL algorithm, including those using data augmentation. We also propose a likelihood ratio test to assess whether or not labels are indeed informative. Finally, we demonstrate the performance of the proposed methods on different datasets, in particular on two medical datasets for which we design pseudo-realistic missing data scenarios. Aude Sportisse, Hugo Schmutz, Olivier Humbert, Charles Bouveyron, Pierre-Alexandre Mattei |
ICML | 1 |
| 2020 | Debiasing Averaged Stochastic Gradient Descent to handle missing valuesabstractStochastic gradient algorithm is a key ingredient of many machine learning methods, particularly appropriate for large-scale learning. However, a major caveat of large data is their incompleteness. We propose an averaged stochastic gradient algorithm handling missing values in linear models. This approach has the merit to be free from the need of any data distribution modeling and to account for heterogeneous missing proportion. In both streaming and finite-sample settings, we prove that this algorithm achieves convergence rate of $\mathcal{O}(\frac{1}{n})$ at the iteration $n$, the same as without missing values. We show the convergence behavior and the relevance of the algorithm not only on synthetic data but also on real data sets, including those collected from medical register. Aude Sportisse, Claire Boyer, Aymeric Dieuleveut, Julie Josse |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2020 | Estimation and Imputation in Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis with Missing Not At Random DataabstractMissing Not At Random (MNAR) values where the probability of having missing data may depend on the missing value itself, are notoriously difficult to account for in analyses, although very frequent in the data. One solution to handle MNAR data is to specify a model for the missing data mechanism, which makes inference or imputation tasks more complex. Furthermore, this implies a strong \textit{a priori} on the parametric form of the distribution. However, some works have obtained guarantees on the estimation of parameters in the presence of MNAR data, without specifying the distribution of missing data \citep{mohan2018estimation, tang2003analysis}. This is very useful in practice, but is limited to simple cases such as few self-masked MNAR variables in data generated according to linear regression models. We continue this line of research, but extend it to a more general MNAR mechanism, in a more general model of the probabilistic principal component analysis (PPCA), \textit{i.e.}, a low-rank model with random effects. We prove identifiability of the PPCA parameters. We then propose an estimation of the loading coefficients and a data imputation method. They are based on estimators of means, variances and covariances of missing variables, for which consistency is discussed. These estimators have the great advantage of being calculated using only the observed information, leveraging the underlying low-rank structure of the data. We illustrate the relevance of the method with numerical experiments on synthetic data and also on two datasets, one collected from a medical register and the other one from a recommendation system. Aude Sportisse, Claire Boyer, Julie Josse |
NeurIPS | 1 |