VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Joshua V. Dillon
dblp:78/8700
· DBLP profile ↗
17ranked-venue papers
4as first author
6since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 16 · 4 first-author · 6 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1
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
10 papers |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 22% Trustworthy machine learning · 20% Generative modeling · 20% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Visualization and visual analytics · 100% |
Topics — the 30 heaviest of 33, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computer vision › Vision and language › vision-language model
multimodal large language model |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | VideoPoet: A Large Language Model for Zero-Shot Video Generation · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | VideoPoet: A Large Language Model for Zero-Shot Video Generation · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › transformer
transformer decoder |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | VideoPoet: A Large Language Model for Zero-Shot Video Generation · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
video generation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | VideoPoet: A Large Language Model for Zero-Shot Video Generation · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › video generation
zero-shot video generation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | VideoPoet: A Large Language Model for Zero-Shot Video Generation · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
0.5 | 2 | 2019 | Can you trust your model's uncertainty? Evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shift · NeurIPS 2019 Likelihood Ratios for Out-of-Distribution Detection · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
approximate bayesian inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | The k-tied Normal Distribution: A Compact Parameterization of Gaussian Mean Field Posteriors in Bayesian Neural Networks · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › deep probabilistic models › bayesian deep learning
bayesian neural networks |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | The k-tied Normal Distribution: A Compact Parameterization of Gaussian Mean Field Posteriors in Bayesian Neural Networks · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | The k-tied Normal Distribution: A Compact Parameterization of Gaussian Mean Field Posteriors in Bayesian Neural Networks · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
distribution shift |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Can you trust your model's uncertainty? Evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shift · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
out-of-distribution detection |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Likelihood Ratios for Out-of-Distribution Detection · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation
predictive uncertainty |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Can you trust your model's uncertainty? Evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shift · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Can you trust your model's uncertainty? Evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shift · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference › variational objective
evidence lower bound |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Fixing a Broken ELBO · ICML 2018 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
information-theoretic representation learning |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Fixing a Broken ELBO · ICML 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
latent variable model |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Fixing a Broken ELBO · ICML 2018 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
rate-distortion tradeoff |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Fixing a Broken ELBO · ICML 2018 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
information bottleneck |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Deep Variational Information Bottleneck · ICLR (Poster) 2017 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › information bottleneck
variational information bottleneck |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Deep Variational Information Bottleneck · ICLR (Poster) 2017 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
neural network compression |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | The k-tied Normal Distribution: A Compact Parameterization of Gaussian Mean Field Posteriors in Bayesian Neural Networks · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › deep probabilistic models
bayesian deep learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Can you trust your model's uncertainty? Evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shift · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical learning theory
asymptotic analysis |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Asymptotic Analysis of Generative Semi-Supervised Learning · ICML 2010 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
generative model |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Asymptotic Analysis of Generative Semi-Supervised Learning · ICML 2010 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
semi-supervised learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Asymptotic Analysis of Generative Semi-Supervised Learning · ICML 2010 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic approximation |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Stochastic Composite Likelihood · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2010 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › visual representation › image representation
bag of visual words |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | The Locally Weighted Bag of Words Framework for Document Representation · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2007 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › text embedding › text representation learning
document representation |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | The Locally Weighted Bag of Words Framework for Document Representation · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2007 |
Visualization and visual analytics › text visualization
document visualization |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Sequential Document Visualization · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2007 |
Information retrieval › document processing › document analysis
document representation |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | Sequential Document Visualization · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2007 |
Information retrieval
retrieval models |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | The Locally Weighted Bag of Words Framework for Document Representation · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2007 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
task-specific adaptation · 0.8pre-training · 0.8autoregressive transformer · 0.8weighted ensemble · 0.7variational inference · 0.6low-rank factorization · 0.4gaussian mean-field variational inference · 0.4likelihood ratio · 0.4deep generative model · 0.4bayesian methods · 0.4multinomial simplex embedding · 0.1local statistical modeling · 0.1locally weighted learning · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | VideoPoet: A Large Language Model for Zero-Shot Video GenerationabstractWe present VideoPoet, a language model capable of synthesizing high-quality video from a large variety of conditioning signals. VideoPoet employs a decoder-only transformer architecture that processes multimodal inputs – including images, videos, text, and audio. The training protocol follows that of Large Language Models (LLMs), consisting of two stages: pretraining and task-specific adaptation. During pretraining, VideoPoet incorporates a mixture of multimodal generative objectives within an autoregressive Transformer framework. The pretrained LLM serves as a foundation that can be adapted for a range of video generation tasks. We present empirical results demonstrating the model’s state-of-the-art capabilities in zero-shot video generation, specifically highlighting the ability to generate high-fidelity motions. Project page: http://sites.research.google/videopoet/ Dan Kondratyuk, Lijun Yu, Xiuye Gu, José Lezama, Jonathan Huang, Grant Schindler, Rachel Hornung, Vighnesh Birodkar, Jimmy Yan, Ming-Chang Chiu, Krishna Somandepalli, Hassan Akbari, Yair Alon, Yong Cheng 0003, Joshua V. Dillon, Agrim Gupta, Meera Hahn, Anja Hauth, David Hendon, Alonso Martinez, David Minnen, Mikhail Sirotenko, Kihyuk Sohn, Hartwig Adam, Ming-Hsuan Yang 0001, Irfan A. Essa, Huisheng Wang, David A. Ross, Bryan Seybold, Lu Jiang 0004 |
ICML | 15 |
| 2023 | Weighted Ensemble Self-Supervised Learning
Yangjun Ruan, Warren R. Morningstar, Alexander A. Alemi, Sergey Ioffe, Ian Fischer, Joshua V. Dillon |
ICLR | 7 |
| 2023 | SubMix: Learning to Mix Graph Sampling HeuristicsabstractSampling subgraphs for training Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) is receiving much attention from the GNN community. While a variety of methods have been proposed, each method samples the graph according to its own heuristic. However, there has been little work in mixing these heuristics in an end-to-end trainable manner. In this work, we design a generative framework for graph sampling. Our method, SubMix, parameterizes subgraph sampling as a convex combination of heuristics. We show that a continuous relaxation of the discrete sampling process allows us to efficiently obtain analytical gradients for training the sampling parameters. Our experimental results illustrate the usefulness of learning graph sampling in three scenarios: (1) robust training of GNNs by automatically learning to discard noisy edge sources; (2) improving model performance by trainable and online edge subset selection; and (3) by integrating our framework into decoupled GNN models improves their performance on standard benchmarks. Sami Abu-El-Haija, Joshua V. Dillon, Bahare Fatemi, Kyriakos Axiotis, Neslihan Bulut, Johannes Gasteiger, Bryan Perozzi, Mohammad Hossein Bateni 0001 |
UAI | 2 |
| 2022 | PACm-Bayes: Narrowing the Empirical Risk Gap in the Misspecified Bayesian RegimeabstractThe Bayesian posterior minimizes the "inferential risk" which itself bounds the "predictive risk." This bound is tight when the likelihood and prior are well-specified. How-ever since misspecification induces a gap,the Bayesian posterior predictive distribution may have poor generalization performance. This work develops a multi-sample loss (PAC$^m$) which can close the gap by spanning a trade-off between the two risks. The loss is computationally favorable and offers PAC generalization guarantees. Empirical study demonstrates improvement to the predictive distribution Warren R. Morningstar, Alexander A. Alemi, Joshua V. Dillon |
AISTATS | 3 |
| 2021 | Density of States Estimation for Out of Distribution DetectionabstractPerhaps surprisingly, recent studies have shown probabilistic model likelihoods have poor specificity for out-of-distribution (OOD) detection and often assign higher likelihoods to OOD data than in-distribution data. To ameliorate this issue we propose DoSE, the density of states estimator. Drawing on the statistical physics notion of “density of states,” the DoSE decision rule avoids direct comparison of model probabilities, and instead utilizes the “probability of the model probability,” or indeed the frequency of any reasonable statistic. The frequency is calculated using nonparametric density estimators (e.g., KDE and one-class SVM) which measure the typicality of various model statistics given the training data and from which we can flag test points with low typicality as anomalous. Unlike many other methods, DoSE requires neither labeled data nor OOD examples. DoSE is modular and can be trivially applied to any existing, trained model. We demonstrate DoSE’s state-of-the-art performance against other unsupervised OOD detectors on previously established “hard” benchmarks. Warren R. Morningstar, Cusuh Ham, Andrew G. Gallagher, Balaji Lakshminarayanan, Alexander A. Alemi, Joshua V. Dillon |
AISTATS | 6 |
| 2021 | Automatic Differentiation Variational Inference with MixturesabstractAutomatic Differentiation Variational Inference (ADVI) is a useful tool for efficiently learning probabilistic models in machine learning. Generally approximate posteriors learned by ADVI are forced to be unimodal in order to facilitate use of the reparameterization trick. In this paper, we show how stratified sampling may be used to enable mixture distributions as the approximate posterior, and derive a new lower bound on the evidence analogous to the importance weighted autoencoder (IWAE). We show that this "SIWAE" is a tighter bound than both IWAE and the traditional ELBO, both of which are special instances of this bound. We verify empirically that the traditional ELBO objective disfavors the presence of multimodal posterior distributions and may therefore not be able to fully capture structure in the latent space. Our experiments show that using the SIWAE objective allows the encoder to learn more complex distributions which regularly contain multimodality, resulting in higher accuracy and better calibration in the presence of incomplete, limited, or corrupted data. Warren R. Morningstar, Sharad M. Vikram, Cusuh Ham, Andrew G. Gallagher, Joshua V. Dillon |
AISTATS | 5 |
| 2020 | The k-tied Normal Distribution: A Compact Parameterization of Gaussian Mean Field Posteriors in Bayesian Neural NetworksabstractVariational Bayesian Inference is a popular methodology for approximating posterior distributions over Bayesian neural network weights. Recent work developing this class of methods has explored ever richer parameterizations of the approximate posterior in the hope of improving performance. In contrast, here we share a curious experimental finding that suggests instead restricting the variational distribution to a more compact parameterization. For a variety of deep Bayesian neural networks trained using Gaussian mean-field variational inference, we find that the posterior standard deviations consistently exhibit strong low-rank structure after convergence. This means that by decomposing these variational parameters into a low-rank factorization, we can make our variational approximation more compact without decreasing the models’ performance. Furthermore, we find that such factorized parameterizations improve the signal-to-noise ratio of stochastic gradient estimates of the variational lower bound, resulting in faster convergence. Jakub Swiatkowski, Kevin Roth, Bastiaan S. Veeling, Joshua V. Dillon, Jasper Snoek, Stephan Mandt, Tim Salimans, Rodolphe Jenatton, Sebastian Nowozin |
ICML | 5 |
| 2019 | Likelihood Ratios for Out-of-Distribution DetectionabstractDiscriminative neural networks offer little or no performance guarantees when deployed on data not generated by the same process as the training distribution. On such out-of-distribution (OOD) inputs, the prediction may not only be erroneous, but confidently so, limiting the safe deployment of classifiers in real-world applications. One such challenging application is bacteria identification based on genomic sequences, which holds the promise of early detection of diseases, but requires a model that can output low confidence predictions on OOD genomic sequences from new bacteria that were not present in the training data. We introduce a genomics dataset for OOD detection that allows other researchers to benchmark progress on this important problem. We investigate deep generative model based approaches for OOD detection and observe that the likelihood score is heavily affected by population level background statistics. We propose a likelihood ratio method for deep generative models which effectively corrects for these confounding background statistics. We benchmark the OOD detection performance of the proposed method against existing approaches on the genomics dataset and show that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance. Finally, we demonstrate the generality of the proposed method by showing that it significantly improves OOD detection when applied to deep generative models of images. Jie Ren 0006, Peter J. Liu, Emily Fertig, Jasper Snoek, Ryan Poplin, Mark A. DePristo, Joshua V. Dillon, Balaji Lakshminarayanan |
NeurIPS | 7 |
| 2019 | Can you trust your model's uncertainty? Evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shiftabstractModern machine learning methods including deep learning have achieved great success in predictive accuracy for supervised learning tasks, but may still fall short in giving useful estimates of their predictive uncertainty. Quantifying uncertainty is especially critical in real-world settings, which often involve input distributions that are shifted from the training distribution due to a variety of factors including sample bias and non-stationarity. In such settings, well calibrated uncertainty estimates convey information about when a model's output should (or should not) be trusted. Many probabilistic deep learning methods, including Bayesian-and non-Bayesian methods, have been proposed in the literature for quantifying predictive uncertainty, but to our knowledge there has not previously been a rigorous large-scale empirical comparison of these methods under dataset shift. We present a large-scale benchmark of existing state-of-the-art methods on classification problems and investigate the effect of dataset shift on accuracy and calibration. We find that traditional post-hoc calibration does indeed fall short, as do several other previous methods. However, some methods that marginalize over models give surprisingly strong results across a broad spectrum of tasks. Jasper Snoek, Yaniv Ovadia, Emily Fertig, Balaji Lakshminarayanan, Sebastian Nowozin, D. Sculley, Joshua V. Dillon, Jie Ren 0006, Zachary Nado |
NeurIPS | 7 |
| 2018 | Fixing a Broken ELBOabstractRecent work in unsupervised representation learning has focused on learning deep directed latentvariable models. Fitting these models by maximizing the marginal likelihood or evidence is typically intractable, thus a common approximation is to maximize the evidence lower bound (ELBO) instead. However, maximum likelihood training (whether exact or approximate) does not necessarily result in a good latent representation, as we demonstrate both theoretically and empirically. In particular, we derive variational lower and upper bounds on the mutual information between the input and the latent variable, and use these bounds to derive a rate-distortion curve that characterizes the tradeoff between compression and reconstruction accuracy. Using this framework, we demonstrate that there is a family of models with identical ELBO, but different quantitative and qualitative characteristics. Our framework also suggests a simple new method to ensure that latent variable models with powerful stochastic decoders do not ignore their latent code. Alexander A. Alemi, Ben Poole, Ian Fischer, Joshua V. Dillon, Rif A. Saurous, Kevin Murphy 0002 |
ICML | 4 |
| 2017 | Deep Variational Information Bottleneck
Alexander A. Alemi, Ian Fischer, Joshua V. Dillon, Kevin Murphy 0002 |
ICLR (Poster) | 3 |
| 2010 | A unified optimization framework for robust pseudo-relevance feedback algorithmsabstractWe present a flexible new optimization framework for finding effective, reliable pseudo-relevance feedback models that unifies existing complementary approaches in a principled way. The result is an algorithmic approach that not only brings together different benefits of previous methods, such as parameter self-tuning and risk reduction from term dependency modeling, but also allows a rich new space of model search strategies to be investigated. We compare the effectiveness of a unified algorithm to existing methods by examining iterative performance and risk-reward tradeoffs. We also discuss extensions for generating new algorithms within our framework. Joshua V. Dillon, Kevyn Collins-Thompson |
CIKM | 1 |
| 2010 | Asymptotic Analysis of Generative Semi-Supervised Learning
Joshua V. Dillon, Krishnakumar Balasubramanian 0002, Guy Lebanon |
ICML | 1 |
| 2010 | Stochastic Composite Likelihood
Joshua V. Dillon, Guy Lebanon |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 1 |
| 2007 | Statistical Translation, Heat Kernels and Expected Distances
Joshua V. Dillon, Guy Lebanon, Jian Zhang 0003 |
UAI | 1 |
| 2007 | The Locally Weighted Bag of Words Framework for Document Representation
Guy Lebanon, Joshua V. Dillon |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 3 |
| 2007 | Sequential Document VisualizationabstractDocuments and other categorical valued time series are often characterized by the frequencies of short range sequential patterns such as n-grams. This representation converts sequential data of varying lengths to high dimensional histogram vectors which are easily modeled by standard statistical models. Unfortunately, the histogram representation ignores most of the medium and long range sequential dependencies making it unsuitable for visualizing sequential data. We present a novel framework for sequential visualization of discrete categorical time series based on the idea of local statistical modeling. The framework embeds categorical time series as smooth curves in the multinomial simplex summarizing the progression of sequential trends. We discuss several visualization techniques based on the above framework and demonstrate their usefulness for document visualization. Joshua V. Dillon, Guy Lebanon |
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. | 2 |