Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Paul M. Riechers
dblp:135/6323
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 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
2 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 42% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 28% Deep learning architectures and training · 15% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Information theory · 100% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
bayesian inference |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Constrained Belief Updates Explain Geometric Structures in Transformer Representations · ICML 2025 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › belief change
belief update |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Constrained Belief Updates Explain Geometric Structures in Transformer Representations · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
mechanistic interpretability |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Constrained Belief Updates Explain Geometric Structures in Transformer Representations · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Constrained Belief Updates Explain Geometric Structures in Transformer Representations · ICML 2025 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
belief representation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Transformers Represent Belief State Geometry in their Residual Stream · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › explainable AI › interpretable deep learning
residual stream analysis |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Transformers Represent Belief State Geometry in their Residual Stream · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › neural network interpretation
transformer interpretability |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Transformers Represent Belief State Geometry in their Residual Stream · NeurIPS 2024 |
Information theory › algorithmic information theory
optimal predictor |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Transformers Represent Belief State Geometry in their Residual Stream · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
next-token prediction · 1.5linear representation analysis · 1.5mechanistic interpretability · 0.9bayesian inference · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Constrained Belief Updates Explain Geometric Structures in Transformer RepresentationsabstractWhat computational structures emerge in transformers trained on next-token prediction? In this work, we provide evidence that transformers implement constrained Bayesian belief updating---a parallelized version of partial Bayesian inference shaped by architectural constraints. We integrate the model-agnostic theory of optimal prediction with mechanistic interpretability to analyze transformers trained on a tractable family of hidden Markov models that generate rich geometric patterns in neural activations. Our primary analysis focuses on single-layer transformers, revealing how the first attention layer implements these constrained updates, with extensions to multi-layer architectures demonstrating how subsequent layers refine these representations. We find that attention carries out an algorithm with a natural interpretation in the probability simplex, and create representations with distinctive geometric structure. We show how both the algorithmic behavior and the underlying geometry of these representations can be theoretically predicted in detail---including the attention pattern, OV-vectors, and embedding vectors---by modifying the equations for optimal future token predictions to account for the architectural constraints of attention. Our approach provides a principled lens on how architectural constraints shape the implementation of optimal prediction, revealing why transformers develop specific intermediate geometric structures. Mateusz Piotrowski, Paul M. Riechers, Daniel Filan, Adam S. Shai |
ICML | 2 |
| 2024 | Transformers Represent Belief State Geometry in their Residual StreamabstractWhat computational structure are we building into large language models when we train them on next-token prediction? Here, we present evidence that this structure is given by the meta-dynamics of belief updating over hidden states of the data- generating process. Leveraging the theory of optimal prediction, we anticipate and then find that belief states are linearly represented in the residual stream of transformers, even in cases where the predicted belief state geometry has highly nontrivial fractal structure. We investigate cases where the belief state geometry is represented in the final residual stream or distributed across the residual streams of multiple layers, providing a framework to explain these observations. Furthermore we demonstrate that the inferred belief states contain information about the entire future, beyond the local next-token prediction that the transformers are explicitly trained on. Our work provides a general framework connecting the structure of training data to the geometric structure of activations inside transformers. Adam S. Shai, Lucas Teixeira, Alexander Gietelink Oldenziel, Sarah Marzen, Paul M. Riechers |
NeurIPS | 5 |