Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Eszter Vértes
dblp:220/5681
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 2 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
5 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 67% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 16% Learning theory · 7% |
Topics — the 14 heaviest of 14, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
model-based reinforcement learning |
1.8 | 3 | 2023 | Investigating the Role of Model-Based Learning in Exploration and Transfer · ICML 2023 Model-Value Inconsistency as a Signal for Epistemic Uncertainty · ICML 2022 Procedural generalization by planning with self-supervised world models · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
exploration |
1.2 | 2 | 2023 | Investigating the Role of Model-Based Learning in Exploration and Transfer · ICML 2023 Model-Value Inconsistency as a Signal for Epistemic Uncertainty · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Procedural generalization by planning with self-supervised world models · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › generalization in reinforcement learning
procedural generalization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Procedural generalization by planning with self-supervised world models · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
safe reinforcement learning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Model-Value Inconsistency as a Signal for Epistemic Uncertainty · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Model-Value Inconsistency as a Signal for Epistemic Uncertainty · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › model-based reinforcement learning
world model |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Procedural generalization by planning with self-supervised world models · ICLR 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
partially observable reinforcement learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | A neurally plausible model learns successor representations in partially observable environments · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › function approximation › representation learning for reinforcement learning
successor representation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | A neurally plausible model learns successor representations in partially observable environments · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › latent variable model › deep latent variable model
helmholtz machine |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Flexible and accurate inference and learning for deep generative models · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › latent variable model
latent generative model |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Flexible and accurate inference and learning for deep generative models · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Flexible and accurate inference and learning for deep generative models · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference
wake-sleep algorithm |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Flexible and accurate inference and learning for deep generative models · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
knowledge transfer |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Investigating the Role of Model-Based Learning in Exploration and Transfer · ICML 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
self-supervised learning · 1.2model-based learning · 0.7value-based planning · 0.6planning · 0.6implicit value ensemble · 0.6bootstrapping · 0.6successor representation · 0.4distributional distributional code · 0.4variational inference · 0.3distributed distributional code · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Investigating the Role of Model-Based Learning in Exploration and TransferabstractState of the art reinforcement learning has enabled training agents on tasks of ever increasing complexity. However, the current paradigm tends to favor training agents from scratch on every new task or on collections of tasks with a view towards generalizing to novel task configurations. The former suffers from poor data efficiency while the latter is difficult when test tasks are out-of-distribution. Agents that can effectively transfer their knowledge about the world pose a potential solution to these issues. In this paper, we investigate transfer learning in the context of model-based agents. Specifically, we aim to understand where exactly environment models have an advantage and why. We find that a model-based approach outperforms controlled model-free baselines for transfer learning. Through ablations, we show that both the policy and dynamics model learnt through exploration matter for successful transfer. We demonstrate our results across three domains which vary in their requirements for transfer: in-distribution procedural (Crafter), in-distribution identical (RoboDesk), and out-of-distribution (Meta-World). Our results show that intrinsic exploration combined with environment models present a viable direction towards agents that are self-supervised and able to generalize to novel reward functions. Jacob C. Walker, Eszter Vértes, Yazhe Li, Gabriel Dulac-Arnold, Ankesh Anand, Theophane Weber, Jessica B. Hamrick |
ICML | 2 |
| 2022 | Procedural generalization by planning with self-supervised world models
Ankesh Anand, Jacob C. Walker, Yazhe Li, Eszter Vértes, Julian Schrittwieser, Sherjil Ozair, Theophane Weber, Jessica B. Hamrick |
ICLR | 4 |
| 2022 | Model-Value Inconsistency as a Signal for Epistemic UncertaintyabstractUsing a model of the environment and a value function, an agent can construct many estimates of a state’s value, by unrolling the model for different lengths and bootstrapping with its value function. Our key insight is that one can treat this set of value estimates as a type of ensemble, which we call an implicit value ensemble (IVE). Consequently, the discrepancy between these estimates can be used as a proxy for the agent’s epistemic uncertainty; we term this signal model-value inconsistency or self-inconsistency for short. Unlike prior work which estimates uncertainty by training an ensemble of many models and/or value functions, this approach requires only the single model and value function which are already being learned in most model-based reinforcement learning algorithms. We provide empirical evidence in both tabular and function approximation settings from pixels that self-inconsistency is useful (i) as a signal for exploration, (ii) for acting safely under distribution shifts, and (iii) for robustifying value-based planning with a learned model. Angelos Filos, Eszter Vértes, Zita Marinho, Gregory Farquhar, Diana Borsa, Abram L. Friesen, Feryal M. P. Behbahani, Tom Schaul, André Barreto 0001, Simon Osindero |
ICML | 2 |
| 2019 | A neurally plausible model learns successor representations in partially observable environmentsabstractAnimals need to devise strategies to maximize returns while interacting with their environment based on incoming noisy sensory observations. Task-relevant states, such as the agent's location within an environment or the presence of a predator, are often not directly observable but must be inferred using available sensory information. Successor representations (SR) have been proposed as a middle-ground between model-based and model-free reinforcement learning strategies, allowing for fast value computation and rapid adaptation to changes in the reward function or goal locations. Indeed, recent studies suggest that features of neural responses are consistent with the SR framework. However, it is not clear how such representations might be learned and computed in partially observed, noisy environments. Here, we introduce a neurally plausible model using \emph{distributional successor features}, which builds on the distributed distributional code for the representation and computation of uncertainty, and which allows for efficient value function computation in partially observed environments via the successor representation. We show that distributional successor features can support reinforcement learning in noisy environments in which direct learning of successful policies is infeasible. Eszter Vértes, Maneesh Sahani |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2018 | Flexible and accurate inference and learning for deep generative modelsabstractWe introduce a new approach to learning in hierarchical latent-variable generative models called the “distributed distributional code Helmholtz machine”, which emphasises flexibility and accuracy in the inferential process. Like the original Helmholtz machine and later variational autoencoder algorithms (but unlike adver- sarial methods) our approach learns an explicit inference or “recognition” model to approximate the posterior distribution over the latent variables. Unlike these earlier methods, it employs a posterior representation that is not limited to a narrow tractable parametrised form (nor is it represented by samples). To train the genera- tive and recognition models we develop an extended wake-sleep algorithm inspired by the original Helmholtz machine. This makes it possible to learn hierarchical latent models with both discrete and continuous variables, where an accurate poste- rior representation is essential. We demonstrate that the new algorithm outperforms current state-of-the-art methods on synthetic, natural image patch and the MNIST data sets. Eszter Vértes, Maneesh Sahani |
NeurIPS | 1 |