Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Niloy Biswas
dblp:255/7032
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 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
2 papers |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
markov chain monte carlo |
1.0 | 2 | 2022 | Scalable Spike-and-Slab · ICML 2022 Estimating Convergence of Markov chains with L-Lag Couplings · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › bayesian model selection
bayesian variable selection |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Scalable Spike-and-Slab · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods › markov chain monte carlo
gibbs sampling |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Scalable Spike-and-Slab · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › sparse bayesian learning
spike-and-slab prior |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Scalable Spike-and-Slab · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
convergence diagnostics |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Estimating Convergence of Markov chains with L-Lag Couplings · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
sequential monte carlo |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Estimating Convergence of Markov chains with L-Lag Couplings · NeurIPS 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
spike-and-slab prior · 0.6gibbs sampling · 0.6wasserstein distance · 0.4total variation · 0.4l-lag coupling · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Scalable Spike-and-SlababstractSpike-and-slab priors are commonly used for Bayesian variable selection, due to their interpretability and favorable statistical properties. However, existing samplers for spike-and-slab posteriors incur prohibitive computational costs when the number of variables is large. In this article, we propose Scalable Spike-and-Slab (S^3), a scalable Gibbs sampling implementation for high-dimensional Bayesian regression with the continuous spike-and-slab prior of George & McCulloch (1993). For a dataset with n observations and p covariates, S^3 has order max{n^2 p_t, np} computational cost at iteration t where p_t never exceeds the number of covariates switching spike-and-slab states between iterations t and t-1 of the Markov chain. This improves upon the order n^2 p per-iteration cost of state-of-the-art implementations as, typically, p_t is substantially smaller than p. We apply S^3 on synthetic and real-world datasets, demonstrating orders of magnitude speed-ups over existing exact samplers and significant gains in inferential quality over approximate samplers with comparable cost. Niloy Biswas, Lester Mackey, Xiao-Li Meng |
ICML | 1 |
| 2019 | Estimating Convergence of Markov chains with L-Lag CouplingsabstractMarkov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods generate samples that are asymptotically distributed from a target distribution of interest as the number of iterations goes to infinity. Various theoretical results provide upper bounds on the distance between the target and marginal distribution after a fixed number of iterations. These upper bounds are on a case by case basis and typically involve intractable quantities, which limits their use for practitioners. We introduce L-lag couplings to generate computable, non-asymptotic upper bound estimates for the total variation or the Wasserstein distance of general Markov chains. We apply L-lag couplings to the tasks of (i) determining MCMC burn-in, (ii) comparing different MCMC algorithms with the same target, and (iii) comparing exact and approximate MCMC. Lastly, we (iv) assess the bias of sequential Monte Carlo and self-normalized importance samplers. Niloy Biswas, Pierre E. Jacob, Paul Vanetti |
NeurIPS | 1 |