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

Adam Pearce

dblp:242/7966 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 since 2021Computer networks · 1 · 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
2 papers
Trustworthy machine learning · 73% Language models and text generation · 18% Representation and self-supervised learning · 9%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Visualization and visual analytics · 100%

Topics — the 8 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.812024
Patchscopes: A Unifying Framework for Inspecting Hidden Representations of Language Models · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
language model interpretability
0.812024
Patchscopes: A Unifying Framework for Inspecting Hidden Representations of Language Models · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › language model interpretability
linguistic representation analysis
0.812024
Patchscopes: A Unifying Framework for Inspecting Hidden Representations of Language Models · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
representation probing
0.812024
Patchscopes: A Unifying Framework for Inspecting Hidden Representations of Language Models · ICML 2024
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › pre-trained language model › pretrained language model analysis
BERT analysis
0.412019
Visualizing and Measuring the Geometry of BERT · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning
representation geometry
0.412019
Visualizing and Measuring the Geometry of BERT · NeurIPS 2019
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › language modeling › language model architecture
transformer language model
0.412019
Visualizing and Measuring the Geometry of BERT · NeurIPS 2019
Visualization and visual analytics › visual analytics › visual analytics for machine learning
model interpretability visualization
0.112019
Visualizing and Measuring the Geometry of BERT · NeurIPS 2019

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

representation projection · 0.8probing · 0.8embedding geometry analysis · 0.8activation patching · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Patchscopes: A Unifying Framework for Inspecting Hidden Representations of Language Models
abstract
Understanding the internal representations of large language models (LLMs) can help explain models' behavior and verify their alignment with human values. Given the capabilities of LLMs in generating human-understandable text, we propose leveraging the model itself to explain its internal representations in natural language. We introduce a framework called Patchscopes and show how it can be used to answer a wide range of questions about an LLM's computation. We show that many prior interpretability methods based on projecting representations into the vocabulary space and intervening on the LLM computation can be viewed as instances of this framework. Moreover, several of their shortcomings such as failure in inspecting early layers or lack of expressivity can be mitigated by Patchscopes. Beyond unifying prior inspection techniques, Patchscopes also opens up *new* possibilities such as using a more capable model to explain the representations of a smaller model, and multihop reasoning error correction.
Asma Ghandeharioun, Avi Caciularu, Adam Pearce, Lucas Dixon, Mor Geva
ICML3
2024 M-SET: Multi-Drone Swarm Intelligence Experimentation with Collision Avoidance Realism
abstract
Distributed sensing by cooperative drone swarms is crucial for several Smart City applications, such as traffic monitoring and disaster response. Using an indoor lab with inexpensive drones, a testbed supports complex and ambitious studies on these systems while maintaining low cost, rigor, and external validity. This paper introduces the Multi-drone Sensing Experimentation Testbed (M-SET), a novel platform designed to prototype, develop, test, and evaluate distributed sensing with swarm intelligence. M-SET addresses the limitations of existing testbeds that fail to emulate collisions, thus lacking realism in outdoor environments. By integrating a collision avoidance method based on a potential field algorithm, M-SET ensures collision-free navigation and sensing, further optimized via a multi-agent collective learning algorithm. Extensive evaluation demonstrates accurate energy consumption estimation and a low risk of collisions, providing a robust proof-of-concept. New insights show that M-SET has significant potential to support ambitious research with minimal cost, simplicity, and high sensing quality.
Chuhao Qin, Alexander Robins, Callum Lillywhite-Roake, Adam Pearce, Hritik Mehta, Scott James, Tsz Ho Wong, Evangelos Pournaras
LCN4
2019 Visualizing and Measuring the Geometry of BERT
abstract
Transformer architectures show significant promise for natural language processing. Given that a single pretrained model can be fine-tuned to perform well on many different tasks, these networks appear to extract generally useful linguistic features. A natural question is how such networks represent this information internally. This paper describes qualitative and quantitative investigations of one particularly effective model, BERT. At a high level, linguistic features seem to be represented in separate semantic and syntactic subspaces. We find evidence of a fine-grained geometric representation of word senses. We also present empirical descriptions of syntactic representations in both attention matrices and individual word embeddings, as well as a mathematical argument to explain the geometry of these representations.
Emily Reif, Ann Yuan, Martin Wattenberg, Fernanda B. Viégas, Andy Coenen, Adam Pearce, Been Kim
NeurIPS6