VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
David Zoro
dblp:410/4766
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 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.
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational science and engineering · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computational science and engineering
benchmark framework |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Common Task Framework For a Critical Evaluation of Scientific Machine Learning Algorithms · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computational science and engineering
scientific machine learning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Common Task Framework For a Critical Evaluation of Scientific Machine Learning Algorithms · NeurIPS 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
common task framework · 1.7benchmarking · 1.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Common Task Framework For a Critical Evaluation of Scientific Machine Learning AlgorithmsabstractMachine learning (ML) is transforming modeling and control in the physical, engineering, and biological sciences. However, rapid development has outpaced the creation of standardized, objective benchmarks—leading to weak baselines, reporting bias, and inconsistent evaluations across methods. This undermines reproducibility, misguides resource allocation, and obscures scientific progress. To address this, we propose a Common Task Framework (CTF) for scientific machine learning. The CTF features a curated set of datasets and task-specific metrics spanning forecasting, state reconstruction, and generalization under realistic constraints, including noise and limited data. Inspired by the success of CTFs in fields like natural language processing and computer vision, our framework provides a structured, rigorous foundation for head-to-head evaluation of diverse algorithms. As a first step, we benchmark methods on two canonical nonlinear systems: Kuramoto-Sivashinsky and Lorenz. These results illustrate the utility of the CTF in revealing method strengths, limitations, and suitability for specific classes of problems and diverse objectives. Next, we are launching a competition around a global real world sea surface temperature dataset with a true holdout dataset to foster community engagement. Our long-term vision is to replace ad hoc comparisons with standardized evaluations on hidden test sets that raise the bar for rigor and reproducibility in scientific ML. Philippe Martin Wyder, Judah Goldfeder, Alexey Yermakov, Stefano Riva, Jan P. Williams, David Zoro, Amy Sara Rude, Matteo Tomasetto, Joe Germany, Joseph Bakarji, Georg Maierhofer, Miles D. Cranmer, J. Nathan Kutz |
NeurIPS | 7 |