Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Colin Graber
dblp:213/3473
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
5as 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 · 6 · 5 first-author · 3 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 3 · 3 first-author · 2 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 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
6 papers |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 35% Video understanding and tracking · 30% Autonomous driving · 12% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computer vision › Segmentation and scene understanding
panoptic segmentation |
1.1 | 2 | 2022 | Joint Forecasting of Panoptic Segmentations with Difference Attention · CVPR 2022 Panoptic Segmentation Forecasting · CVPR 2021 |
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking › video prediction
panoptic segmentation forecasting |
1.1 | 2 | 2022 | Joint Forecasting of Panoptic Segmentations with Difference Attention · CVPR 2022 Panoptic Segmentation Forecasting · CVPR 2021 |
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking
video prediction |
1.1 | 2 | 2022 | Joint Forecasting of Panoptic Segmentations with Difference Attention · CVPR 2022 Panoptic Segmentation Forecasting · CVPR 2021 |
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking › object tracking › 3d object tracking
3d multi-object tracking |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | STT: Stateful Tracking with Transformers for Autonomous Driving · ICRA 2024 |
Robotics › Autonomous driving
perception |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | STT: Stateful Tracking with Transformers for Autonomous Driving · ICRA 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
graphical models |
0.7 | 2 | 2019 | Graph Structured Prediction Energy Networks · NeurIPS 2019 Deep Structured Prediction with Nonlinear Output Transformations · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
structured prediction |
0.7 | 2 | 2019 | Graph Structured Prediction Energy Networks · NeurIPS 2019 Deep Structured Prediction with Nonlinear Output Transformations · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured prediction
structured prediction energy network |
0.7 | 2 | 2019 | Graph Structured Prediction Energy Networks · NeurIPS 2019 Deep Structured Prediction with Nonlinear Output Transformations · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
latent variable model |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Dynamic Neural Relational Inference · CVPR 2020 |
Machine learning › Graph learning › relation modeling
relational inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Dynamic Neural Relational Inference · CVPR 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › latent variable model
sequential latent variable model |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Dynamic Neural Relational Inference · CVPR 2020 |
Robotics › Autonomous driving
trajectory prediction |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Dynamic Neural Relational Inference · CVPR 2020 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical dependence
high-order correlation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Graph Structured Prediction Energy Networks · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › neural network inference
DNN inference |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Deep Structured Prediction with Nonlinear Output Transformations · NeurIPS 2018 |
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping
state estimation |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | STT: Stateful Tracking with Transformers for Autonomous Driving · ICRA 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
transformer · 1.3joint optimization · 0.8difference attention · 0.6depth estimation · 0.6odometry anticipation · 0.5instance dynamics prediction · 0.5sequential latent variable model · 0.4neural relational inference · 0.4energy-based inference · 0.4energy-based model · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | STT: Stateful Tracking with Transformers for Autonomous DrivingabstractTracking objects in three-dimensional space is critical for autonomous driving. To ensure safety while driving, the tracker must be able to reliably track objects across frames and accurately estimate their states such as velocity and acceleration in the present. Existing works frequently focus on the association task while either neglecting the model’s performance on state estimation or deploying complex heuristics to predict the states. In this paper, we propose STT, a Stateful Tracking model built with Transformers, that can consistently track objects in the scenes while also predicting their states accurately. STT consumes rich appearance, geometry, and motion signals through long term history of detections and is jointly optimized for both data association and state estimation tasks. Since the standard tracking metrics like MOTA and MOTP do not capture the combined performance of the two tasks in the wider spectrum of object states, we extend them with new metrics called S-MOTA and MOTPSthat address this limitation. STT achieves competitive real-time performance on the Waymo Open Dataset. Longlong Jing, Ruichi Yu, Zhengli Zhao, Shiwei Sheng, Colin Graber, Qinru Li, Shangxuan Wu, Chris Sweeney, Wei-Chih Hung, Xingyi Zhou, Farshid Moussavi, James Guo, Mingxing Tan, Weilong Yang |
ICRA | 6 |
| 2022 | Joint Forecasting of Panoptic Segmentations with Difference AttentionabstractForecasting of a representation is important for safe and effective autonomy. For this, panoptic segmentations have been studied as a compelling representation in recent work. However, recent state-of-the-art on panoptic segmentation forecasting suffers from two issues: first, individual object instances are treated independently of each other; second, individual object instance forecasts are merged in a heuristic manner. To address both issues, we study a new panoptic segmentation forecasting model that jointly forecasts all object instances in a scene using a transformer model based on ‘difference attention.’ It further refines the predictions by taking depth estimates into account. We evaluate the proposed model on the Cityscapes and AIODrive datasets. We find difference attention to be particularly suitable for forecasting because the difference of quantities like locations enables a model to explicitly reason about velocities and acceleration. Because of this, we attain state-of-the-art on panoptic segmentation forecasting metrics. Colin Graber, Cyril Jazra, Wenjie Luo 0002, Liangyan Gui, Alexander G. Schwing |
CVPR | 1 |
| 2021 | Panoptic Segmentation ForecastingabstractOur goal is to forecast the near future given a set of recent observations. We think this ability to forecast, i.e., to anticipate, is integral for the success of autonomous agents which need not only passively analyze an observation but also must react to it in real-time. Importantly, accurate forecasting hinges upon the chosen scene decomposition. We think that superior forecasting can be achieved by decomposing a dynamic scene into individual ‘things’ and background ‘stuff’. Background ‘stuff’ largely moves because of camera motion, while foreground ‘things’ move because of both camera and individual object motion. Following this decomposition, we introduce panoptic segmentation forecasting. Panoptic segmentation forecasting opens up a middle-ground between existing extremes, which either forecast instance trajectories or predict the appearance of future image frames. To address this task we develop a two-component model: one component learns the dynamics of the background stuff by anticipating odometry, the other one anticipates the dynamics of detected things. We establish a leaderboard for this novel task, and validate a state-of-the-art model that outperforms available baselines. Colin Graber, Grace Tsai, Michael Firman, Gabriel J. Brostow, Alexander G. Schwing |
CVPR | 1 |
| 2020 | Dynamic Neural Relational InferenceabstractUnderstanding interactions between entities, e.g., joints of the human body, team sports players, etc., is crucial for tasks like forecasting. However, interactions between entities are commonly not observed and often hard to quantify. To address this challenge, recently, `Neural Relational Inference' was introduced. It predicts static relations between entities in a system and provides an interpretable representation of the underlying system dynamics that are used for better trajectory forecasting. However, generally, relations between entities change as time progresses. Hence, static relations improperly model the data. In response to this, we develop Dynamic Neural Relational Inference (dNRI), which incorporates insights from sequential latent variable models to predict separate relation graphs for every time-step. We demonstrate on several real-world datasets that modeling dynamic relations improves forecasting of complex trajectories. Colin Graber, Alexander G. Schwing |
CVPR | 1 |
| 2019 | Graph Structured Prediction Energy NetworksabstractFor joint inference over multiple variables, a variety of structured prediction techniques have been developed to model correlations among variables and thereby improve predictions. However, many classical approaches suffer from one of two primary drawbacks: they either lack the ability to model high-order correlations among variables while maintaining computationally tractable inference, or they do not allow to explicitly model known correlations. To address this shortcoming, we introduce ‘Graph Structured Prediction Energy Networks,’ for which we develop inference techniques that allow to both model explicit local and implicit higher-order correlations while maintaining tractability of inference. We apply the proposed method to tasks from the natural language processing and computer vision domain and demonstrate its general utility. Colin Graber, Alexander G. Schwing |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2018 | Deep Structured Prediction with Nonlinear Output TransformationsabstractDeep structured models are widely used for tasks like semantic segmentation, where explicit correlations between variables provide important prior information which generally helps to reduce the data needs of deep nets. However, current deep structured models are restricted by oftentimes very local neighborhood structure, which cannot be increased for computational complexity reasons, and by the fact that the output configuration, or a representation thereof, cannot be transformed further. Very recent approaches which address those issues include graphical model inference inside deep nets so as to permit subsequent non-linear output space transformations. However, optimization of those formulations is challenging and not well understood. Here, we develop a novel model which generalizes existing approaches, such as structured prediction energy networks, and discuss a formulation which maintains applicability of existing inference techniques. Colin Graber, Ofer Meshi, Alexander G. Schwing |
NeurIPS | 1 |