Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Johnny Xi
dblp:374/6660
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-author · 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 · 76% Representation and self-supervised learning · 24% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › causal inference › causal discovery
bivariate causal discovery |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Distinguishing Cause from Effect with Causal Velocity Models · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › causal inference
causal discovery |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Distinguishing Cause from Effect with Causal Velocity Models · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › causal representation learning
identifiability |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Identifying Metric Structures of Deep Latent Variable Models · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
latent variable model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Identifying Metric Structures of Deep Latent Variable Models · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › causal inference › causal model
structural causal model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Distinguishing Cause from Effect with Causal Velocity Models · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
causal inference |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Propensity Score Alignment of Unpaired Multimodal Data · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
multimodal representation learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Propensity Score Alignment of Unpaired Multimodal Data · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › causal inference
propensity score |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Propensity Score Alignment of Unpaired Multimodal Data · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › latent variable model
deep latent variable model |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Identifying Metric Structures of Deep Latent Variable Models · ICML 2025 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › single-cell analysis
single-cell data integration |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Propensity Score Alignment of Unpaired Multimodal Data · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
shared nearest neighbours · 1.5propensity score estimation · 1.5optimal transport matching · 1.5score matching · 0.9measure transport · 0.9dynamical systems · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Identifying Metric Structures of Deep Latent Variable ModelsabstractDeep latent variable models learn condensed representations of data that, hopefully, reflect the inner workings of the studied phenomena. Unfortunately, these latent representations are not statistically identifiable, meaning they cannot be uniquely determined. Domain experts, therefore, need to tread carefully when interpreting these. Current solutions limit the lack of identifiability through additional constraints on the latent variable model, e.g. by requiring labeled training data, or by restricting the expressivity of the model. We change the goal: instead of identifying the latent variables, we identify relationships between them such as meaningful distances, angles, and volumes. We prove this is feasible under very mild model conditions and without additional labeled data. We empirically demonstrate that our theory results in more reliable latent distances, offering a principled path forward in extracting trustworthy conclusions from deep latent variable models. Stas Syrota, Yevgen Zainchkovskyy, Johnny Xi, Benjamin Bloem-Reddy, Søren Hauberg |
ICML | 3 |
| 2025 | Distinguishing Cause from Effect with Causal Velocity ModelsabstractBivariate structural causal models (SCM) are often used to infer causal direction by examining their goodness-of-fit under restricted model classes. In this paper, we describe a parametrization of bivariate SCMs in terms of a causal velocity by viewing the cause variable as time in a dynamical system. The velocity implicitly defines counterfactual curves via the solution of initial value problems where the observation specifies the initial condition. Using tools from measure transport, we obtain a unique correspondence between SCMs and the score function of the generated distribution via its causal velocity. Based on this, we derive an objective function that directly regresses the velocity against the score function, the latter of which can be estimated non-parametrically from observational data. We use this to develop a method for bivariate causal discovery that extends beyond known model classes such as additive or location-scale noise, and that requires no assumptions on the noise distributions. When the score is estimated well, the objective is also useful for detecting model non–identifiability and misspecification. We present positive results in simulation and benchmark experiments where many existing methods fail, and perform ablation studies to examine the method’s sensitivity to accurate score estimation. Johnny Xi, Hugh Dance, Peter Orbanz, Benjamin Bloem-Reddy |
ICML | 1 |
| 2024 | Propensity Score Alignment of Unpaired Multimodal DataabstractMultimodal representation learning techniques typically require paired samples to learn shared representations, but collecting paired samples can be challenging in fields like biology, where measurement devices often destroy the samples. This paper presents an approach to address the challenge of aligning unpaired samples across disparate modalities in multimodal representation learning. We draw an analogy between potential outcomes in causal inference and potential views in multimodal observations, allowing us to leverage Rubin's framework to estimate a common space for matching samples. Our approach assumes experimentally perturbed samples by treatments, and uses this to estimate a propensity score from each modality. We show that the propensity score encapsulates all shared information between a latent state and treatment, and can be used to define a distance between samples. We experiment with two alignment techniques that leverage this distance---shared nearest neighbours (SNN) and optimal transport (OT) matching---and find that OT matching results in significant improvements over state-of-the-art alignment approaches in on synthetic multi-modal tasks, in real-world data from NeurIPS Multimodal Single-Cell Integration Challenge, and on a single cell microscopy to expression prediction task. Johnny Xi, Jana Osea, Zuheng Xu, Jason S. Hartford |
NeurIPS | 1 |