Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
William G. Macready
dblp:07/6818
· DBLP profile ↗
14ranked-venue papers
2as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 13 · 2 first-author · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 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
6 papers |
Generative modeling · 31% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 31% Segmentation and scene understanding · 23% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 64% Quantum computing and quantum information · 28% Mathematical optimization · 8% |
Topics — the 20 heaviest of 21, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Generative modeling
variational autoencoder |
1.1 | 3 | 2020 | Undirected Graphical Models as Approximate Posteriors · ICML 2020 DVAE#: Discrete Variational Autoencoders with Relaxed Boltzmann Priors · NeurIPS 2018 DVAE++: Discrete Variational Autoencoders with Overlapping Transformations · ICML 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
approximate bayesian inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Undirected Graphical Models as Approximate Posteriors · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
boltzmann machine |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Undirected Graphical Models as Approximate Posteriors · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › graphical models
markov random field |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Undirected Graphical Models as Approximate Posteriors · ICML 2020 |
Computer vision › Segmentation and scene understanding
semantic segmentation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Semi-Supervised Semantic Image Segmentation With Self-Correcting Networks · CVPR 2020 |
Computer vision › Segmentation and scene understanding › annotation-efficient segmentation
semi-supervised semantic segmentation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Semi-Supervised Semantic Image Segmentation With Self-Correcting Networks · CVPR 2020 |
Computer vision › Segmentation and scene understanding › semantic segmentation
weakly supervised semantic segmentation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Semi-Supervised Semantic Image Segmentation With Self-Correcting Networks · CVPR 2020 |
Quantum computing and quantum information › quantum computational models
quantum annealing |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Solving SAT (and MaxSAT) with a quantum annealer: Foundations, encodings, and preliminary results · Inf. Comput. 2020 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
satisfiability |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Solving SAT (and MaxSAT) with a quantum annealer: Foundations, encodings, and preliminary results · Inf. Comput. 2020 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › satisfiability
SAT solving |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Solving SAT (and MaxSAT) with a quantum annealer: Foundations, encodings, and preliminary results · Inf. Comput. 2020 |
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection › object detection
domain adaptive object detection |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | A Robust Learning Approach to Domain Adaptive Object Detection · ICCV 2019 |
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
object detection |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | A Robust Learning Approach to Domain Adaptive Object Detection · ICCV 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › latent variable model
discrete latent variable model |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | DVAE++: Discrete Variational Autoencoders with Overlapping Transformations · ICML 2018 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › variational autoencoder
discrete variational autoencoder |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | DVAE#: Discrete Variational Autoencoders with Relaxed Boltzmann Priors · NeurIPS 2018 |
Mathematical optimization
combinatorial optimization |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Solving SAT (and MaxSAT) with a quantum annealer: Foundations, encodings, and preliminary results · Inf. Comput. 2020 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › satisfiability
maximum satisfiability |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Solving SAT (and MaxSAT) with a quantum annealer: Foundations, encodings, and preliminary results · Inf. Comput. 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
robust learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | A Robust Learning Approach to Domain Adaptive Object Detection · ICCV 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
gaussian process |
0.0 | 1 | 2004 | Parameter space exploration with Gaussian process trees · ICML 2004 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process
non-stationary gaussian process |
0.0 | 1 | 2004 | Parameter space exploration with Gaussian process trees · ICML 2004 |
Computational science and engineering › scientific machine learning
surrogate modeling |
0.0 | 1 | 2004 | Parameter space exploration with Gaussian process trees · ICML 2004 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
overlapping transformations · 0.7self-training · 0.4self-correction network · 0.4quantum annealing · 0.4markov chain monte carlo · 0.4bounding box supervision · 0.4backpropagation through MCMC · 0.4robust optimization · 0.4noisy label learning · 0.4gumbel-softmax · 0.3boltzmann machine priors · 0.3gaussian process · 0.0binary tree partitioning · 0.0bayesian optimization · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Neural-Guided Runtime Prediction of Planners for Improved Motion and Task Planning with Graph Neural NetworksabstractThe past decade has amply demonstrated the remarkable functionality that can be realized by learning complex input/output relationships. Algorithmically, one of the most important and opaque relationships is that between a problem's structure and an effective solution method. Here, we quantitatively connect the structure of a planning problem to the performance of a given sampling-based motion planning (SBMP) algorithm. We demonstrate that the geometric relationships of motion planning problems can be well captured by graph neural networks (GNNs) to predict SBMP runtime. By using an algorithm portfolio we show that GNN predictions of runtime on particular problems can be leveraged to accelerate online motion planning in both navigation and manipulation tasks. Moreover, the problem-to-runtime map can be inverted to identify subproblems easier to solve by particular SBMPs. We provide a motivating example of how this knowledge may be used to improve integrated task and motion planning on simulated examples. These successes rely on the relational structure of GNNs to capture scalable generalization from low-dimensional navigation tasks to high degree-of-freedom manipulation tasks in 3d environments. Simon Odense, Kamal Gupta 0001, William G. Macready |
IROS | 3 |
| 2020 | Semi-Supervised Semantic Image Segmentation With Self-Correcting NetworksabstractBuilding a large image dataset with high-quality object masks for semantic segmentation is costly and time-consuming. In this paper, we introduce a principled semi-supervised framework that only use a small set of fully supervised images (having semantic segmentation labels and box labels) and a set of images with only object bounding box labels (we call it the weak-set). Our framework trains the primary segmentation model with the aid of an ancillary model that generates initial segmentation labels for the weak-set and a self-correction module that improves the generated labels during training using the increasingly accurate primary model. We introduce two variants of the self-correction module using either linear or convolutional functions. Experiments on the PASCAL VOC 2012 and Cityscape datasets show that our models trained with a small fully supervised set perform similar to, or better than, models trained with a large fully supervised set while requiring 7x less annotation effort. Mostafa S. Ibrahim, Arash Vahdat, Mani Ranjbar, William G. Macready |
CVPR | 4 |
| 2020 | Undirected Graphical Models as Approximate PosteriorsabstractThe representation of the approximate posterior is a critical aspect of effective variational autoencoders (VAEs). Poor choices for the approximate posterior have a detrimental impact on the generative performance of VAEs due to the mismatch with the true posterior. We extend the class of posterior models that may be learned by using undirected graphical models. We develop an efficient method to train undirected approximate posteriors by showing that the gradient of the training objective with respect to the parameters of the undirected posterior can be computed by backpropagation through Markov chain Monte Carlo updates. We apply these gradient estimators for training discrete VAEs with Boltzmann machines as approximate posteriors and demonstrate that undirected models outperform previous results obtained using directed graphical models. Our implementation is publicly available. Arash Vahdat, Evgeny Andriyash, William G. Macready |
ICML | 3 |
| 2020 | Solving SAT (and MaxSAT) with a quantum annealer: Foundations, encodings, and preliminary results
Zhengbing Bian, Fabián A. Chudak, William G. Macready, Aidan Roy, Roberto Sebastiani, Stefano Varotti |
Inf. Comput. | 3 |
| 2019 | A Robust Learning Approach to Domain Adaptive Object DetectionabstractDomain shift is unavoidable in real-world applications of object detection. For example, in self-driving cars, the target domain consists of unconstrained road environments which cannot all possibly be observed in training data. Similarly, in surveillance applications sufficiently representative training data may be lacking due to privacy regulations. In this paper, we address the domain adaptation problem from the perspective of robust learning and show that the problem may be formulated as training with noisy labels. We propose a robust object detection framework that is resilient to noise in bounding box class labels, locations and size annotations. To adapt to the domain shift, the model is trained on the target domain using a set of noisy object bounding boxes that are obtained by a detection model trained only in the source domain. We evaluate the accuracy of our approach in various source/target domain pairs and demonstrate that the model significantly improves the state-of-the-art on multiple domain adaptation scenarios on the SIM10K, Cityscapes and KITTI datasets. Mehran Khodabandeh, Arash Vahdat, Mani Ranjbar, William G. Macready |
ICCV | 4 |
| 2018 | DVAE++: Discrete Variational Autoencoders with Overlapping TransformationsabstractTraining of discrete latent variable models remains challenging because passing gradient information through discrete units is difficult. We propose a new class of smoothing transformations based on a mixture of two overlapping distributions, and show that the proposed transformation can be used for training binary latent models with either directed or undirected priors. We derive a new variational bound to efficiently train with Boltzmann machine priors. Using this bound, we develop DVAE++, a generative model with a global discrete prior and a hierarchy of convolutional continuous variables. Experiments on several benchmarks show that overlapping transformations outperform other recent continuous relaxations of discrete latent variables including Gumbel-Softmax (Maddison et al., 2016; Jang et al., 2016), and discrete variational autoencoders (Rolfe 2016). Arash Vahdat, William G. Macready, Zhengbing Bian, Amir Khoshaman, Evgeny Andriyash |
ICML | 2 |
| 2018 | DVAE#: Discrete Variational Autoencoders with Relaxed Boltzmann PriorsabstractBoltzmann machines are powerful distributions that have been shown to be an effective prior over binary latent variables in variational autoencoders (VAEs). However, previous methods for training discrete VAEs have used the evidence lower bound and not the tighter importance-weighted bound. We propose two approaches for relaxing Boltzmann machines to continuous distributions that permit training with importance-weighted bounds. These relaxations are based on generalized overlapping transformations and the Gaussian integral trick. Experiments on the MNIST and OMNIGLOT datasets show that these relaxations outperform previous discrete VAEs with Boltzmann priors. An implementation which reproduces these results is available. Arash Vahdat, Evgeny Andriyash, William G. Macready |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2005 | Coevolutionary free lunchesabstractRecent work on the foundational underpinnings of black-box optimization has begun to uncover a rich mathematical structure. In particular, it is now known that an inner product between the optimization algorithm and the distribution of optimization problems likely to be encountered fixes the distribution over likely performances in running that algorithm. One ramification of this is the "No Free Lunch" (NFL) theorems, which state that any two algorithms are equivalent when their performance is averaged across all possible problems. This highlights the need for exploiting problem-specific knowledge to achieve better than random performance. In this paper, we present a general framework covering most optimization scenarios. In addition to the optimization scenarios addressed in the NFL results, this framework covers multiarmed bandit problems and evolution of multiple coevolving players. As a particular instance of the latter, it covers "self-play" problems. In these problems, the set of players work together to produce a champion, who then engages one or more antagonists in a subsequent multiplayer game. In contrast to the traditional optimization case where the NFL results hold, we show that in self-play there are free lunches: in coevolution some algorithms have better performance than other algorithms, averaged across all possible problems. However, in the typical coevolutionary scenarios encountered in biology, where there is no champion, the NFL theorems still hold. David H. Wolpert, William G. Macready |
IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. | 2 |
| 2004 | Parameter space exploration with Gaussian process treesabstractComputer experiments often require dense sweeps over input parameters to obtain a qualitative understanding of their response. Such sweeps can be prohibitively expensive, and are unnecessary in regions where the response is easy predicted; well-chosen designs could allow a mapping of the response with far fewer simulation runs. Thus, there is a need for computationally inexpensive surrogate models and an accompanying method for selecting small designs. We explore a general methodology for addressing this need that uses non-stationary Gaussian processes. Binary trees partition the input space to facilitate non-stationarity and a Bayesian interpretation provides an explicit measure of predictive uncertainty that can be used to guide sampling. Our methods are illustrated on several examples, including a motivating example involving computational fluid dynamics simulation of a NASA reentry vehicle. Robert B. Gramacy, Herbert K. H. Lee, William G. Macready |
ICML | 3 |
| 2001 | Remarks on a recent paper on the "no free lunch" theoremsabstractThis note discusses the recent paper "Some technical remarks on the proof of the no free lunch theorem" by Koppen (2000). In that paper, some technical issues related to the formal proof of the no free lunch (NFL) theorem for search were given by Wolpert and Macready (1995, 1997). The present authors explore the issues raised in that paper including the presentation of a simpler version of the NFL proof in accord with a suggestion made explicitly by Koppen (2000) and implicitly by Wolpert and Macready (1997). They also includes the correction of an incorrect claim made by Koppen (2000) of a limitation of the NFL theorem. Finally, some thoughts on future research directions for research into algorithm performance are given. Mario Köppen, David H. Wolpert, William G. Macready |
IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. | 3 |
| 1999 | Learning landscapes: regression on discrete spacesabstractIt is often useful to be able to reconstruct landscapes from a set of data points sampled from the landscape. Neural networks and other supervised learning techniques can accomplish this task but typically do not exploit the metric structure of discrete input spaces. We propose a new method based on Gaussian processes which reconstructs landscapes over discrete spaces from data sampled from the landscape and optional prior beliefs about the correlation structure of the landscape. In addition to speeding up costly fitness evaluations, the methods can be used to characterize landscapes in terms of a small set of easily interpretable quantities. William G. Macready, Bennett S. Levitan |
CEC | 1 |
| 1999 | An Efficient Method To Estimate Bagging's Generalization Error
David H. Wolpert, William G. Macready |
Mach. Learn. | 2 |
| 1998 | Bandit problems and the exploration/exploitation tradeoffabstractWe explore the two-armed bandit with Gaussian payoffs as a theoretical model for optimization. The problem is formulated from a Bayesian perspective, and the optimal strategy for both one and two pulls is provided. We present regions of parameter space where a greedy strategy is provably optimal. We also compare the greedy and optimal strategies to one based on a genetic algorithm. In doing so, we correct a previous error in the literature concerning the Gaussian bandit problem and the supposed optimality of genetic algorithms for this problem. Finally, we provide an analytically simple bandit model that is more directly applicable to optimization theory than the traditional bandit problem and determine a near-optimal strategy for that model. William G. Macready, David H. Wolpert |
IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. | 1 |
| 1997 | No free lunch theorems for optimizationabstractA framework is developed to explore the connection between effective optimization algorithms and the problems they are solving. A number of "no free lunch" (NFL) theorems are presented which establish that for any algorithm, any elevated performance over one class of problems is offset by performance over another class. These theorems result in a geometric interpretation of what it means for an algorithm to be well suited to an optimization problem. Applications of the NFL theorems to information-theoretic aspects of optimization and benchmark measures of performance are also presented. Other issues addressed include time-varying optimization problems and a priori "head-to-head" minimax distinctions between optimization algorithms, distinctions that result despite the NFL theorems' enforcing of a type of uniformity over all algorithms. David H. Wolpert, William G. Macready |
IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. | 2 |