EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Anna Bair
dblp:206/3739
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 1 first-author · 3 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
3 papers |
Efficient and distributed learning · 50% Trustworthy machine learning · 23% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 13% |
Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression |
1.5 | 2 | 2024 | A Simple and Effective Pruning Approach for Large Language Models · ICLR 2024 Adaptive Sharpness-Aware Pruning for Robust Sparse Networks · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
pruning |
1.5 | 2 | 2024 | A Simple and Effective Pruning Approach for Large Language Models · ICLR 2024 Adaptive Sharpness-Aware Pruning for Robust Sparse Networks · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
1.3 | 2 | 2024 | Adaptive Sharpness-Aware Pruning for Robust Sparse Networks · ICLR 2024 Robustness between the worst and average case · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › gradient-based optimization
sharpness-aware minimization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Adaptive Sharpness-Aware Pruning for Robust Sparse Networks · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression › pruning
unstructured pruning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | A Simple and Effective Pruning Approach for Large Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
adversarial robustness |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Robustness between the worst and average case · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference
partition function estimation |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Robustness between the worst and average case · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › sampling
transition path sampling |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Robustness between the worst and average case · NeurIPS 2021 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | A Simple and Effective Pruning Approach for Large Language Models · ICLR 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
magnitude pruning · 0.8activation-aware weight selection · 0.8metropolis-hastings · 0.5hamiltonian monte carlo · 0.5MCMC · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Adaptive Sharpness-Aware Pruning for Robust Sparse NetworksabstractRobustness and compactness are two essential attributes of deep learning models that are deployed in the real world.
The goals of robustness and compactness may seem to be at odds, since robustness requires generalization across domains, while the process of compression exploits specificity in one domain.
We introduce \textit{Adaptive Sharpness-Aware Pruning (AdaSAP)}, which unifies these goals through the lens of network sharpness.
The AdaSAP method produces sparse networks that are robust to input variations which are \textit{unseen at training time}.
We achieve this by strategically incorporating weight perturbations in order to optimize the loss landscape. This allows the model to be both primed for pruning and regularized for improved robustness.
AdaSAP improves the robust accuracy of pruned models on image classification by up to +6\% on ImageNet C and +4\% on ImageNet V2, and on object detection by +4\% on a corrupted Pascal VOC dataset, over a wide range of compression ratios, pruning criteria, and network architectures, outperforming recent pruning art by large margins. Anna Bair, Hongxu Yin, Maying Shen, Pavlo Molchanov 0001, José M. Álvarez 0004 |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2024 | A Simple and Effective Pruning Approach for Large Language ModelsabstractAs their size increases, Large Languages Models (LLMs) are natural candidates for network pruning methods: approaches that drop a subset of network weights while striving to preserve performance. Existing methods, however, require either retraining, which is rarely affordable for billion-scale LLMs, or solving a weight reconstruction problem reliant on second-order information, which may also be computationally expensive. In this paper, we introduce a novel, straightforward yet effective pruning method, termed Wanda (Pruning by Weights and activations), designed to induce sparsity in pretrained LLMs. Motivated by the recent observation of emergent large magnitude features in LLMs, our approach prunes weights with the smallest magnitudes multiplied by the corresponding input activations, on a per-output basis. Notably, Wanda requires no retraining or weight update, and the pruned LLM can be used as is. We conduct a thorough evaluation of our method Wanda on LLaMA and LLaMA-2 across various language benchmarks. Wanda significantly outperforms the established baseline of magnitude pruning and performs competitively against recent method involving intensive weight update. Mingjie Sun, Zhuang Liu 0003, Anna Bair, J. Zico Kolter |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2021 | Robustness between the worst and average caseabstractSeveral recent works in machine learning have focused on evaluating the test-time robustness of a classifier: how well the classifier performs not just on the target domain it was trained upon, but upon perturbed examples. In these settings, the focus has largely been on two extremes of robustness: the robustness to perturbations drawn at random from within some distribution (i.e., robustness to random perturbations), and the robustness to the worst case perturbation in some set (i.e., adversarial robustness). In this paper, we argue that a sliding scale between these two extremes provides a valuable additional metric by which to gauge robustness. Specifically, we illustrate that each of these two extremes is naturally characterized by a (functional) q-norm over perturbation space, with q=1 corresponding to robustness to random perturbations and q=\infty corresponding to adversarial perturbations. We then present the main technical contribution of our paper: a method for efficiently estimating the value of these norms by interpreting them as the partition function of a particular distribution, then using path sampling with MCMC methods to estimate this partition function (either traditional Metropolis-Hastings for non-differentiable perturbations, or Hamiltonian Monte Carlo for differentiable perturbations). We show that our approach provides substantially better estimates than simple random sampling of the actual “intermediate-q” robustness of both standard, data-augmented, and adversarially-trained classifiers, illustrating a clear tradeoff between classifiers that optimize different metrics. Code for reproducing experiments can be found at https://github.com/locuslab/intermediate_robustness. Leslie Rice, Anna Bair, Huan Zhang 0001, J. Zico Kolter |
NeurIPS | 2 |