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.

James Baskerville

dblp:413/4237 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
AI safety
0.912025
Combining Cost Constrained Runtime Monitors for AI Safety · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › model monitoring
runtime monitoring
0.912025
Combining Cost Constrained Runtime Monitors for AI Safety · NeurIPS 2025

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

neyman-pearson lemma · 0.9likelihood ratio · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Combining Cost Constrained Runtime Monitors for AI Safety
abstract
Monitoring AIs at runtime can help us detect and stop harmful actions. In this paper, we study how to efficiently combine multiple runtime monitors into a single monitoring protocol. The protocol's objective is to maximize the probability of applying a safety intervention on misaligned outputs (i.e., maximize recall). Since running monitors and applying safety interventions are costly, the protocol also needs to adhere to an average-case budget constraint. Taking the monitors' performance and cost as given, we develop an algorithm to find the best protocol. The algorithm exhaustively searches over when and which monitors to call, and allocates safety interventions based on the Neyman-Pearson lemma. By focusing on likelihood ratios and strategically trading off spending on monitors against spending on interventions, we more than double our recall rate compared to a naive baseline in a code review setting. We also show that combining two monitors can Pareto dominate using either monitor alone. Our framework provides a principled methodology for combining existing monitors to detect undesirable behavior in cost-sensitive settings.
Tim Tian Hua, James Baskerville, Henri Lemoine, Mia Hopman, Aryan Bhatt, Tyler Tracy
NeurIPS2