Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Maxime Robeyns
dblp:341/3478
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 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 · 27% Reinforcement learning · 17% Language models and text generation · 10% |
Topics — the 11 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › deep probabilistic models › bayesian deep learning
bayesian neural networks |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Bayesian Low-rank Adaptation for Large Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
calibration |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Bayesian Low-rank Adaptation for Large Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Bayesian Low-rank Adaptation for Large Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
parameter-efficient fine-tuning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Bayesian Low-rank Adaptation for Large Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process › hierarchical gaussian process
deep gaussian process |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | A theory of representation learning gives a deep generalisation of kernel methods · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
gaussian process |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | A theory of representation learning gives a deep generalisation of kernel methods · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory
infinite-width limit |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | A theory of representation learning gives a deep generalisation of kernel methods · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
model-based reinforcement learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Taylor TD-learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation analysis
representation learning theory |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | A theory of representation learning gives a deep generalisation of kernel methods · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
temporal difference learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Taylor TD-learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
variance reduction |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Taylor TD-learning · NeurIPS 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
low-rank adaptation · 0.8laplace approximation · 0.8taylor series expansion · 0.7inducing point methods · 0.7bayesian representation learning limit · 0.7TD3 · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Bayesian Low-rank Adaptation for Large Language ModelsabstractParameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) has emerged as a new paradigm for cost-efficient fine-tuning of large language models (LLMs), with low-rank adaptation (LoRA) being a widely adopted choice. However, fine-tuned LLMs often become overconfident especially when fine-tuned on small datasets. Bayesian methods, with their inherent ability to estimate uncertainty, serve as potent tools to mitigate overconfidence and enhance calibration. In this work, we introduce Laplace-LoRA, a straightforward yet effective Bayesian method, which applies the Laplace approximation to the LoRA parameters and, considerably boosts the calibration of fine-tuned LLMs. Adam X. Yang, Maxime Robeyns, Laurence Aitchison |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2023 | A theory of representation learning gives a deep generalisation of kernel methodsabstractThe successes of modern deep machine learning methods are founded on their ability to transform inputs across multiple layers to build good high-level representations. It is therefore critical to understand this process of representation learning. However, standard theoretical approaches (formally NNGPs) involving infinite width limits eliminate representation learning. We therefore develop a new infinite width limit, the Bayesian representation learning limit, that exhibits representation learning mirroring that in finite-width models, yet at the same time, retains some of the simplicity of standard infinite-width limits. In particular, we show that Deep Gaussian processes (DGPs) in the Bayesian representation learning limit have exactly multivariate Gaussian posteriors, and the posterior covariances can be obtained by optimizing an interpretable objective combining a log-likelihood to improve performance with a series of KL-divergences which keep the posteriors close to the prior. We confirm these results experimentally in wide but finite DGPs. Next, we introduce the possibility of using this limit and objective as a flexible, deep generalisation of kernel methods, that we call deep kernel machines (DKMs). Like most naive kernel methods, DKMs scale cubically in the number of datapoints. We therefore use methods from the Gaussian process inducing point literature to develop a sparse DKM that scales linearly in the number of datapoints. Finally, we extend these approaches to NNs (which have non-Gaussian posteriors) in the Appendices. Adam X. Yang, Maxime Robeyns, Edward Milsom, Ben Anson, Nandi Schoots, Laurence Aitchison |
ICML | 2 |
| 2023 | Taylor TD-learningabstractMany reinforcement learning approaches rely on temporal-difference (TD) learning to learn a critic.
However, TD-learning updates can be high variance.
Here, we introduce a model-based RL framework, Taylor TD, which reduces this variance in continuous state-action settings.
Taylor TD uses a first-order Taylor series expansion of TD updates.
This expansion allows Taylor TD to analytically integrate over stochasticity in the action-choice, and some stochasticity in the state distribution for the initial state and action of each TD update.
We include theoretical and empirical evidence that Taylor TD updates are indeed lower variance than standard TD updates.
Additionally, we show Taylor TD has the same stable learning guarantees as standard TD-learning with linear function approximation under a reasonable assumption.
Next, we combine Taylor TD with the TD3 algorithm, forming TaTD3.
We show TaTD3 performs as well, if not better, than several state-of-the art model-free and model-based baseline algorithms on a set of standard benchmark tasks. Michele Garibbo, Maxime Robeyns, Laurence Aitchison |
NeurIPS | 2 |