Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jackson Gorham
dblp:47/10044 · also Jack Gorham
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
3as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 3 first-author · 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
5 papers |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 86% Kernel, tree and ensemble methods · 12% Optimization for machine learning · 2% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 14 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
markov chain monte carlo |
1.3 | 4 | 2020 | Stochastic Stein Discrepancies · NeurIPS 2020 Stein Point Markov Chain Monte Carlo · ICML 2019 Measuring Sample Quality with Kernels · ICML 2017 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference › particle-based variational inference
stein variational gradient descent |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Stochastic Stein Discrepancies · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Stochastic Stein Discrepancies · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
convergence diagnostics |
0.4 | 2 | 2020 | Measuring Sample Quality with Kernels · ICML 2017 Stochastic Stein Discrepancies · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
bayesian inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Stein Point Markov Chain Monte Carlo · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
approximate bayesian inference |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Stein Points · ICML 2018 |
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods
kernel methods |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Measuring Sample Quality with Kernels · ICML 2017 |
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods › kernel methods
reproducing kernel hilbert space |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Measuring Sample Quality with Kernels · ICML 2017 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › divergence measure
stein discrepancy |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Measuring Sample Quality with Kernels · ICML 2017 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
monte carlo estimation |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Measuring Sample Quality with Stein's Method · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › model criticism
sample quality assessment |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | Measuring Sample Quality with Stein's Method · NIPS 2015 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference
approximate inference |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Stochastic Stein Discrepancies · NeurIPS 2020 |
Mathematical optimization
nonconvex optimization |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Stein Point Markov Chain Monte Carlo · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
posterior inference |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Measuring Sample Quality with Stein's Method · NIPS 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
stein discrepancy · 1.4markov chain sampling · 0.8kernel stein discrepancy · 0.6stein's method · 0.5stochastic subsampling · 0.4greedy method · 0.3conditional gradient method · 0.3reproducing kernels · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Optimal Quantisation of Probability Measures Using Maximum Mean DiscrepancyabstractSeveral researchers have proposed minimisation of maximum mean discrepancy (MMD) as a method to quantise probability measures, i.e., to approximate a distribution by a representative point set. We consider sequential algorithms that greedily minimise MMD over a discrete candidate set. We propose a novel non-myopic algorithm and, in order to both improve statistical efficiency and reduce computational cost, we investigate a variant that applies this technique to a mini-batch of the candidate set at each iteration. When the candidate points are sampled from the target, the consistency of these new algorithms—and their mini-batch variants—is established. We demonstrate the algorithms on a range of important computational problems, including optimisation of nodes in Bayesian cubature and the thinning of Markov chain output. Onur Teymur, Jackson Gorham, Marina Riabiz, Chris J. Oates |
AISTATS | 2 |
| 2020 | Stochastic Stein DiscrepanciesabstractStein discrepancies (SDs) monitor convergence and non-convergence in approximate inference when exact integration and sampling are intractable. However, the computation of a Stein discrepancy can be prohibitive if the Stein operator -- often a sum over likelihood terms or potentials -- is expensive to evaluate. To address this deficiency, we show that stochastic Stein discrepancies (SSDs) based on subsampled approximations of the Stein operator inherit the convergence control properties of standard SDs with probability 1. Along the way, we establish the convergence of Stein variational gradient descent (SVGD) on unbounded domains, resolving an open question of Liu (2017). In our experiments with biased Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) hyperparameter tuning, approximate MCMC sampler selection, and stochastic SVGD, SSDs deliver comparable inferences to standard SDs with orders of magnitude fewer likelihood evaluations. Jackson Gorham, Anant Raj, Lester Mackey |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2019 | Stein Point Markov Chain Monte CarloabstractAn important task in machine learning and statistics is the approximation of a probability measure by an empirical measure supported on a discrete point set. Stein Points are a class of algorithms for this task, which proceed by sequentially minimising a Stein discrepancy between the empirical measure and the target and, hence, require the solution of a non-convex optimisation problem to obtain each new point. This paper removes the need to solve this optimisation problem by, instead, selecting each new point based on a Markov chain sample path. This significantly reduces the computational cost of Stein Points and leads to a suite of algorithms that are straightforward to implement. The new algorithms are illustrated on a set of challenging Bayesian inference problems, and rigorous theoretical guarantees of consistency are established. Wilson Ye Chen, Alessandro Barp, François-Xavier Briol, Jackson Gorham, Mark A. Girolami, Lester Mackey, Chris J. Oates |
ICML | 4 |
| 2018 | Stein PointsabstractAn important task in computational statistics and machine learning is to approximate a posterior distribution $p(x)$ with an empirical measure supported on a set of representative points $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^n$. This paper focuses on methods where the selection of points is essentially deterministic, with an emphasis on achieving accurate approximation when $n$ is small. To this end, we present Stein Points. The idea is to exploit either a greedy or a conditional gradient method to iteratively minimise a kernel Stein discrepancy between the empirical measure and $p(x)$. Our empirical results demonstrate that Stein Points enable accurate approximation of the posterior at modest computational cost. In addition, theoretical results are provided to establish convergence of the method. Wilson Ye Chen, Lester Mackey, Jackson Gorham, François-Xavier Briol, Chris J. Oates |
ICML | 3 |
| 2017 | Measuring Sample Quality with KernelsabstractApproximate Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) offers the promise of more rapid sampling at the cost of more biased inference. Since standard MCMC diagnostics fail to detect these biases, researchers have developed computable Stein discrepancy measures that provably determine the convergence of a sample to its target distribution. This approach was recently combined with the theory of reproducing kernels to define a closed-form kernel Stein discrepancy (KSD) computable by summing kernel evaluations across pairs of sample points. We develop a theory of weak convergence for KSDs based on Stein’s method, demonstrate that commonly used KSDs fail to detect non-convergence even for Gaussian targets, and show that kernels with slowly decaying tails provably determine convergence for a large class of target distributions. The resulting convergence-determining KSDs are suitable for comparing biased, exact, and deterministic sample sequences and simpler to compute and parallelize than alternative Stein discrepancies. We use our tools to compare biased samplers, select sampler hyperparameters, and improve upon existing KSD approaches to one-sample hypothesis testing and sample quality improvement. Jackson Gorham, Lester Mackey |
ICML | 1 |
| 2015 | Measuring Sample Quality with Stein's MethodabstractTo improve the efficiency of Monte Carlo estimation, practitioners are turning to biased Markov chain Monte Carlo procedures that trade off asymptotic exactness for computational speed. The reasoning is sound: a reduction in variance due to more rapid sampling can outweigh the bias introduced. However, the inexactness creates new challenges for sampler and parameter selection, since standard measures of sample quality like effective sample size do not account for asymptotic bias. To address these challenges, we introduce a new computable quality measure based on Stein's method that bounds the discrepancy between sample and target expectations over a large class of test functions. We use our tool to compare exact, biased, and deterministic sample sequences and illustrate applications to hyperparameter selection, convergence rate assessment, and quantifying bias-variance tradeoffs in posterior inference. Jackson Gorham, Lester Mackey |
NIPS | 1 |