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

Jihao Andreas Lin

dblp:279/2864 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
4as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 4 first-author · 5 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
4 papers
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 70% Optimization for machine learning · 22% Learning theory · 9%
Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Mathematical optimization · 50% Algorithms and data structures · 50%

Topics — the 11 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
gaussian process
3.042025
Scalable Gaussian Processes with Latent Kronecker Structure · ICML 2025
Improving Linear System Solvers for Hyperparameter Optimisation in Iterative Gaussian Processes · NeurIPS 2024
Stochastic Gradient Descent for Gaussian Processes Done Right · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process
scalable gaussian process
0.912025
Scalable Gaussian Processes with Latent Kronecker Structure · ICML 2025
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process
gaussian process regression
0.812024
Stochastic Gradient Descent for Gaussian Processes Done Right · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
hyperparameter optimization
0.812024
Improving Linear System Solvers for Hyperparameter Optimisation in Iterative Gaussian Processes · NeurIPS 2024
Mathematical optimization › iterative methods
conjugate gradient method
0.812024
Improving Linear System Solvers for Hyperparameter Optimisation in Iterative Gaussian Processes · NeurIPS 2024
Algorithms and data structures › numerical linear algebra
linear system solving
0.812024
Improving Linear System Solvers for Hyperparameter Optimisation in Iterative Gaussian Processes · NeurIPS 2024
Algorithms and data structures
numerical linear algebra
0.812024
Improving Linear System Solvers for Hyperparameter Optimisation in Iterative Gaussian Processes · NeurIPS 2024
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization › stochastic gradient methods
stochastic gradient descent
0.812024
Stochastic Gradient Descent for Gaussian Processes Done Right · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory
implicit bias
0.712023
Sampling from Gaussian Process Posteriors using Stochastic Gradient Descent · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › sampling
posterior sampling
0.712023
Sampling from Gaussian Process Posteriors using Stochastic Gradient Descent · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent
0.712023
Sampling from Gaussian Process Posteriors using Stochastic Gradient Descent · NeurIPS 2023

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

warm-starting · 1.5variational approximation · 1.5stochastic dual descent · 1.5preconditioned conjugate gradient · 1.5pathwise gradient estimator · 1.5early stopping · 1.5pathwise conditioning · 0.9iterative linear system solver · 0.9spectral characterization · 0.7inducing points · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Scalable Gaussian Processes with Latent Kronecker Structure
abstract
Applying Gaussian processes (GPs) to very large datasets remains a challenge due to limited computational scalability. Matrix structures, such as the Kronecker product, can accelerate operations significantly, but their application commonly entails approximations or unrealistic assumptions. In particular, the most common path to creating a Kronecker-structured kernel matrix is by evaluating a product kernel on gridded inputs that can be expressed as a Cartesian product. However, this structure is lost if any observation is missing, breaking the Cartesian product structure, which frequently occurs in real-world data such as time series. To address this limitation, we propose leveraging latent Kronecker structure, by expressing the kernel matrix of observed values as the projection of a latent Kronecker product. In combination with iterative linear system solvers and pathwise conditioning, our method facilitates inference of exact GPs while requiring substantially fewer computational resources than standard iterative methods. We demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art sparse and variational GPs on real-world datasets with up to five million examples, including robotics, automated machine learning, and climate applications.
Jihao Andreas Lin, Sebastian Ament, Maximilian Balandat, David Eriksson, José Miguel Hernández-Lobato, Eytan Bakshy
ICML1
2024 Stochastic Gradient Descent for Gaussian Processes Done Right
abstract
As is well known, both sampling from the posterior and computing the mean of the posterior in Gaussian process regression reduces to solving a large linear system of equations. We study the use of stochastic gradient descent for solving this linear system, and show that when done right---by which we mean using specific insights from the optimisation and kernel communities---stochastic gradient descent is highly effective. To that end, we introduce a particularly simple stochastic dual descent algorithm, explain its design in an intuitive manner and illustrate the design choices through a series of ablation studies. Further experiments demonstrate that our new method is highly competitive. In particular, our evaluations on the UCI regression tasks and on Bayesian optimisation set our approach apart from preconditioned conjugate gradients and variational Gaussian process approximations. Moreover, our method places Gaussian process regression on par with state-of-the-art graph neural networks for molecular binding affinity prediction.
Jihao Andreas Lin, Shreyas Padhy, Javier Antorán, Austin Tripp, Alexander Terenin, Csaba Szepesvári, José Miguel Hernández-Lobato, David Janz
ICLR1
2024 Improving Linear System Solvers for Hyperparameter Optimisation in Iterative Gaussian Processes
abstract
Scaling hyperparameter optimisation to very large datasets remains an open problem in the Gaussian process community. This paper focuses on iterative methods, which use linear system solvers, like conjugate gradients, alternating projections or stochastic gradient descent, to construct an estimate of the marginal likelihood gradient. We discuss three key improvements which are applicable across solvers: (i) a pathwise gradient estimator, which reduces the required number of solver iterations and amortises the computational cost of making predictions, (ii) warm starting linear system solvers with the solution from the previous step, which leads to faster solver convergence at the cost of negligible bias, (iii) early stopping linear system solvers after a limited computational budget, which synergises with warm starting, allowing solver progress to accumulate over multiple marginal likelihood steps. These techniques provide speed-ups of up to $72\times$ when solving to tolerance, and decrease the average residual norm by up to $7\times$ when stopping early.
Jihao Andreas Lin, Shreyas Padhy, Bruno Mlodozeniec, Javier Antorán, José Miguel Hernández-Lobato
NeurIPS1
2023 Sampling from Gaussian Process Posteriors using Stochastic Gradient Descent
abstract
Gaussian processes are a powerful framework for quantifying uncertainty and for sequential decision-making but are limited by the requirement of solving linear systems. In general, this has a cubic cost in dataset size and is sensitive to conditioning. We explore stochastic gradient algorithms as a computationally efficient method of approximately solving these linear systems: we develop low-variance optimization objectives for sampling from the posterior and extend these to inducing points. Counterintuitively, stochastic gradient descent often produces accurate predictions, even in cases where it does not converge quickly to the optimum. We explain this through a spectral characterization of the implicit bias from non-convergence. We show that stochastic gradient descent produces predictive distributions close to the true posterior both in regions with sufficient data coverage, and in regions sufficiently far away from the data. Experimentally, stochastic gradient descent achieves state-of-the-art performance on sufficiently large-scale or ill-conditioned regression tasks. Its uncertainty estimates match the performance of significantly more expensive baselines on a large-scale Bayesian~optimization~task.
Jihao Andreas Lin, Javier Antorán, Shreyas Padhy, David Janz, José Miguel Hernández-Lobato, Alexander Terenin
NeurIPS1
2021 Latent Derivative Bayesian Last Layer Networks
abstract
Bayesian neural networks (BNN) are powerful parametric models for nonlinear regression with uncertainty quantification. However, the approximate inference techniques for weight space priors suffer from several drawbacks. The ‘Bayesian last layer’ (BLL) is an alternative BNN approach that learns the feature space for an exact Bayesian linear model with explicit predictive distributions. However, its predictions outside of the data distribution (OOD) are typically overconfident, as the marginal likelihood objective results in a learned feature space that overfits to the data. We overcome this weakness by introducing a functional prior on the model’s derivatives w.r.t. the inputs. Treating these Jacobians as latent variables, we incorporate the prior into the objective to influence the smoothness and diversity of the features, which enables greater predictive uncertainty. For the BLL, the Jacobians can be computed directly using forward mode automatic differentiation, and the distribution over Jacobians may be obtained in closed-form. We demonstrate this method enhances the BLL to Gaussian process-like performance on tasks where calibrated uncertainty is critical: OOD regression, Bayesian optimization and active learning, which include high-dimensional real-world datasets.
Joe Watson, Jihao Andreas Lin, Pascal Klink, Joni Pajarinen, Jan Peters 0001
AISTATS2