Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Julia Hörrmann
dblp:245/7748
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as 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 · 2 · 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
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Information theory · 50% Mathematical optimization · 50% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness › adversarial robustness
adversarial training |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Why adversarial training can hurt robust accuracy · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
robust accuracy |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Why adversarial training can hurt robust accuracy · ICLR 2023 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Why adversarial training can hurt robust accuracy · ICLR 2023 |
Mathematical optimization
conditional independence testing |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | The Weighted Generalised Covariance Measure · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022 |
Information theory
hypothesis testing |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | The Weighted Generalised Covariance Measure · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
adversarial training · 0.7simulation · 0.6nonlinear regression · 0.6generalised covariance measure · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Why adversarial training can hurt robust accuracy
Jacob Clarysse, Julia Hörrmann, Fanny Yang |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2022 | The Weighted Generalised Covariance MeasureabstractWe introduce a new test for conditional independence which is based on what we call the weighted generalised covariance measure (WGCM). It is an extension of the recently introduced generalised covariance measure (GCM). To test the null hypothesis of $X$ and $Y$ being conditionally independent given $Z$, our test statistic is a weighted form of the sample covariance between the residuals of nonlinearly regressing $X$ and $Y$ on $Z$. We propose different variants of the test for both univariate and multivariate $X$ and $Y$. We give conditions under which the tests yield the correct type I error rate. Finally, we compare our novel tests to the original GCM using simulation and on real data sets. Typically, our tests have power against a wider class of alternatives compared to the GCM. This comes at the cost of having less power against alternatives for which the GCM already works well. In the special case of binary or categorical $X$ and $Y$, one of our tests has power against all alternatives. Cyrill Scheidegger, Julia Hörrmann, Peter Bühlmann |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 2 |