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.
? Tutorial for this page

Heiko Strathmann

dblp:126/1783 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
11ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 11 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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
9 papers
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 40% Generative modeling · 18% 3D vision · 17%

Topics — the 23 heaviest of 24, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
markov chain monte carlo
0.732016
A Kernel Test of Goodness of Fit · ICML 2016
Gradient-free Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with Efficient Kernel Exponential Families · NIPS 2015
Kernel Adaptive Metropolis-Hastings · ICML 2014
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods › importance sampling
annealed importance sampling
0.612022
Score-Based Diffusion meets Annealed Importance Sampling · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model
0.612022
Score-Based Diffusion meets Annealed Importance Sampling · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › bayesian model selection
marginal likelihood estimation
0.612022
Score-Based Diffusion meets Annealed Importance Sampling · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model
score-based generative model
0.612022
Score-Based Diffusion meets Annealed Importance Sampling · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory
hypothesis testing
0.522017
Generative Models and Model Criticism via Optimized Maximum Mean Discrepancy · ICLR (Poster) 2017
A Kernel Test of Goodness of Fit · ICML 2016
Computer vision › 3D vision › 3d generation
3d scene generation
0.512021
NeRF-VAE: A Geometry Aware 3D Scene Generative Model · ICML 2021
Computer vision › 3D vision
3d scene understanding
0.512021
NeRF-VAE: A Geometry Aware 3D Scene Generative Model · ICML 2021
Computer vision › 3D vision
neural radiance field
0.512021
NeRF-VAE: A Geometry Aware 3D Scene Generative Model · ICML 2021
Machine learning › Learning theory › probability metric › integral probability metric
maximum mean discrepancy
0.422017
Generative Models and Model Criticism via Optimized Maximum Mean Discrepancy · ICLR (Poster) 2017
Optimal kernel choice for large-scale two-sample tests · NIPS 2012
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process › kernel design
deep kernel learning
0.412019
Learning deep kernels for exponential family densities · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning
discrete representation learning
0.412019
SOM-VAE: Interpretable Discrete Representation Learning on Time Series · ICLR (Poster) 2019
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
exponential family
0.412019
Learning deep kernels for exponential family densities · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › sequence representation learning
time series representation learning
0.412019
SOM-VAE: Interpretable Discrete Representation Learning on Time Series · ICLR (Poster) 2019
Machine learning › Generative modeling
generative model evaluation
0.312017
Generative Models and Model Criticism via Optimized Maximum Mean Discrepancy · ICLR (Poster) 2017
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
model criticism
0.312017
Generative Models and Model Criticism via Optimized Maximum Mean Discrepancy · ICLR (Poster) 2017
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods
kernel methods
0.322015
Gradient-free Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with Efficient Kernel Exponential Families · NIPS 2015
Kernel Adaptive Metropolis-Hastings · ICML 2014
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
convergence diagnostics
0.212016
A Kernel Test of Goodness of Fit · ICML 2016
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
goodness-of-fit testing
0.212016
A Kernel Test of Goodness of Fit · ICML 2016
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods › markov chain monte carlo
hamiltonian monte carlo
0.212015
Gradient-free Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with Efficient Kernel Exponential Families · NIPS 2015
Machine learning › Generative modeling
variational autoencoder
0.212022
Score-Based Diffusion meets Annealed Importance Sampling · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods
kernel selection
0.112012
Optimal kernel choice for large-scale two-sample tests · NIPS 2012
Machine learning › Learning theory › hypothesis testing
two-sample testing
0.112012
Optimal kernel choice for large-scale two-sample tests · NIPS 2012

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

variational autoencoder · 0.9reproducing kernel hilbert space · 0.8markov chain · 0.6langevin dynamics · 0.6importance sampling · 0.6hamiltonian dynamics · 0.6differentiable volume rendering · 0.5amortized inference · 0.5maximum mean discrepancy · 0.4self-organizing map · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Score-Based Diffusion meets Annealed Importance Sampling
abstract
More than twenty years after its introduction, Annealed Importance Sampling (AIS) remains one of the most effective methods for marginal likelihood estimation. It relies on a sequence of distributions interpolating between a tractable initial distribution and the target distribution of interest which we simulate from approximately using a non-homogeneous Markov chain. To obtain an importance sampling estimate of the marginal likelihood, AIS introduces an extended target distribution to reweight the Markov chain proposal. While much effort has been devoted to improving the proposal distribution used by AIS, by changing the intermediate distributions and corresponding Markov kernels, an underappreciated issue is that AIS uses a convenient but suboptimal extended target distribution. This can hinder its performance. We here leverage recent progress in score-based generative modeling (SGM) to approximate the optimal extended target distribution for AIS proposals corresponding to the discretization of Langevin and Hamiltonian dynamics. We demonstrate these novel, differentiable, AIS procedures on a number of synthetic benchmark distributions and variational auto-encoders.
Arnaud Doucet, Will Grathwohl, Alexander G. de G. Matthews, Heiko Strathmann
NeurIPS4
2021 NeRF-VAE: A Geometry Aware 3D Scene Generative Model
abstract
We propose NeRF-VAE, a 3D scene generative model that incorporates geometric structure via Neural Radiance Fields (NeRF) and differentiable volume rendering. In contrast to NeRF, our model takes into account shared structure across scenes, and is able to infer the structure of a novel scene—without the need to re-train—using amortized inference. NeRF-VAE’s explicit 3D rendering process further contrasts previous generative models with convolution-based rendering which lacks geometric structure. Our model is a VAE that learns a distribution over radiance fields by conditioning them on a latent scene representation. We show that, once trained, NeRF-VAE is able to infer and render geometrically-consistent scenes from previously unseen 3D environments of synthetic scenes using very few input images. We further demonstrate that NeRF-VAE generalizes well to out-of-distribution cameras, while convolutional models do not. Finally, we introduce and study an attention-based conditioning mechanism of NeRF-VAE’s decoder, which improves model performance.
Adam R. Kosiorek, Heiko Strathmann, Daniel Zoran, Pol Moreno, Rosália G. Schneider, Sona Mokrá, Danilo Jimenez Rezende
ICML2
2019 SOM-VAE: Interpretable Discrete Representation Learning on Time Series
Vincent Fortuin, Matthias Hüser, Francesco Locatello, Heiko Strathmann, Gunnar Rätsch
ICLR (Poster)4
2019 Learning deep kernels for exponential family densities
abstract
The kernel exponential family is a rich class of distributions, which can be fit efficiently and with statistical guarantees by score matching. Being required to choose a priori a simple kernel such as the Gaussian, however, limits its practical applicability. We provide a scheme for learning a kernel parameterized by a deep network, which can find complex location-dependent local features of the data geometry. This gives a very rich class of density models, capable of fitting complex structures on moderate-dimensional problems. Compared to deep density models fit via maximum likelihood, our approach provides a complementary set of strengths and tradeoffs: in empirical studies, the former can yield higher likelihoods, whereas the latter gives better estimates of the gradient of the log density, the score, which describes the distribution’s shape.
Danica J. Sutherland, Heiko Strathmann, Arthur Gretton
ICML3
2018 Efficient and principled score estimation with Nyström kernel exponential families
abstract
We propose a fast method with statistical guarantees for learning an exponential family density model where the natural parameter is in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space, and may be infinite dimensional. The model is learned by fitting the derivative of the log density, the score, thus avoiding the need to compute a normalization constant. We improved the computational efficiency of an earlier solution with a low-rank, Nyström-like solution. The new solution retains the consistency and convergence rates of the full-rank solution (exactly in Fisher distance, and nearly in other distances), with guarantees on the degree of cost and storage reduction. We evaluate the method in experiments on density estimation and in the construction of an adaptive Hamiltonian Monte Carlo sampler. Compared to an existing score learning approach using a denoising autoencoder, our estimator is empirically more data-efficient when estimating the score, runs faster, and has fewer parameters (which can be tuned in a principled and interpretable way), in addition to providing statistical guarantees.
Danica J. Sutherland, Heiko Strathmann, Michael Arbel, Arthur Gretton
AISTATS2
2017 Generative Models and Model Criticism via Optimized Maximum Mean Discrepancy
Danica J. Sutherland, Hsiao-Yu Fish Tung, Heiko Strathmann, Soumyajit De, Aaditya Ramdas, Alexander J. Smola, Arthur Gretton
ICLR (Poster)3
2017 Kernel Sequential Monte Carlo
Ingmar Schuster, Heiko Strathmann, Brooks Paige, Dino Sejdinovic
ECML/PKDD (1)2
2016 A Kernel Test of Goodness of Fit
abstract
We propose a nonparametric statistical test for goodness-of-fit: given a set of samples, the test determines how likely it is that these were generated from a target density function. The measure of goodness-of-fit is a divergence constructed via Stein’s method using functions from a Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Space. Our test statistic is based on an empirical estimate of this divergence, taking the form of a V-statistic in terms of the log gradients of the target density and the kernel. We derive a statistical test, both for i.i.d. and non-i.i.d. samples, where we estimate the null distribution quantiles using a wild bootstrap procedure. We apply our test to quantifying convergence of approximate Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods, statistical model criticism, and evaluating quality of fit vs model complexity in nonparametric density estimation.
Kacper Chwialkowski, Heiko Strathmann, Arthur Gretton
ICML2
2015 Gradient-free Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with Efficient Kernel Exponential Families
abstract
We propose Kernel Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (KMC), a gradient-free adaptive MCMC algorithm based on Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (HMC). On target densities where classical HMC is not an option due to intractable gradients, KMC adaptively learns the target's gradient structure by fitting an exponential family model in a Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Space. Computational costs are reduced by two novel efficient approximations to this gradient. While being asymptotically exact, KMC mimics HMC in terms of sampling efficiency, and offers substantial mixing improvements over state-of-the-art gradient free samplers. We support our claims with experimental studies on both toy and real-world applications, including Approximate Bayesian Computation and exact-approximate MCMC.
Heiko Strathmann, Dino Sejdinovic, Samuel Livingstone, Zoltán Szabó 0001, Arthur Gretton
NIPS1
2014 Kernel Adaptive Metropolis-Hastings
abstract
A Kernel Adaptive Metropolis-Hastings algorithm is introduced, for the purpose of sampling from a target distribution with strongly nonlinear support. The algorithm embeds the trajectory of the Markov chain into a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS), such that the feature space covariance of the samples informs the choice of proposal. The procedure is computationally efficient and straightforward to implement, since the RKHS moves can be integrated out analytically: our proposal distribution in the original space is a normal distribution whose mean and covariance depend on where the current sample lies in the support of the target distribution, and adapts to its local covariance structure. Furthermore, the procedure requires neither gradients nor any other higher order information about the target, making it particularly attractive for contexts such as Pseudo-Marginal MCMC. Kernel Adaptive Metropolis-Hastings outperforms competing fixed and adaptive samplers on multivariate, highly nonlinear target distributions, arising in both real-world and synthetic examples.
Dino Sejdinovic, Heiko Strathmann, Maria Lomeli, Christophe Andrieu, Arthur Gretton
ICML2
2012 Optimal kernel choice for large-scale two-sample tests
abstract
Abstract Given samples from distributions $p$ and $q$, a two-sample test determines whether to reject the null hypothesis that $p=q$, based on the value of a test statistic measuring the distance between the samples. One choice of test statistic is the maximum mean discrepancy (MMD), which is a distance between embeddings of the probability distributions in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space. The kernel used in obtaining these embeddings is thus critical in ensuring the test has high power, and correctly distinguishes unlike distributions with high probability. A means of parameter selection for the two-sample test based on the MMD is proposed. For a given test level (an upper bound on the probability of making a Type I error), the kernel is chosen so as to maximize the test power, and minimize the probability of making a Type II error. The test statistic, test threshold, and optimization over the kernel parameters are obtained with cost linear in the sample size. These properties make the kernel selection and test procedures suited to data streams, where the observations cannot all be stored in memory. In experiments, the new kernel selection approach yields a more powerful test than earlier kernel selection heuristics.
Arthur Gretton, Bharath K. Sriperumbudur, Dino Sejdinovic, Heiko Strathmann, Sivaraman Balakrishnan, Massimiliano Pontil, Kenji Fukumizu
NIPS4