EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Aristeidis Panos
dblp:223/5785
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
4as first author
5since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0002-2718-7317ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 4 first-author · 5 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 1 first-author · 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
3 papers |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 42% Efficient and distributed learning · 22% Deep learning architectures and training · 14% |
Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › point process
marked point processes |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Decomposable Transformer Point Processes · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
point process |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Decomposable Transformer Point Processes · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Decomposable Transformer Point Processes · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms › continual learning
class-incremental learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | First Session Adaptation: A Strong Replay-Free Baseline for Class-Incremental Learning · ICCV 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
parameter-efficient fine-tuning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | First Session Adaptation: A Strong Replay-Free Baseline for Class-Incremental Learning · ICCV 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process
gaussian process regression |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | How Good Are Low-Rank Approximations in Gaussian Process Regression? · AAAI 2022 |
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods › kernel methods
kernel approximation |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | How Good Are Low-Rank Approximations in Gaussian Process Regression? · AAAI 2022 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
low-rank approximation |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | How Good Are Low-Rank Approximations in Gaussian Process Regression? · AAAI 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › latent variable model
mixture model |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Decomposable Transformer Point Processes · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
mixture of log-normals · 0.8markov property · 0.8attention mechanism · 0.8replay-free learning · 0.7linear discriminant analysis · 0.7featurewise layer modulation · 0.7random fourier features · 0.6mercer expansion · 0.6kullback-leibler divergence bounds · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Decomposable Transformer Point ProcessesabstractThe standard paradigm of modeling marked point processes is by parameterizing the intensity function using an attention-based (Transformer-style) architecture. Despite the flexibility of these methods, their inference is based on the computationally intensive thinning algorithm. In this work, we propose a framework where the advantages of the attention-based architecture are maintained and the limitation of the thinning algorithm is circumvented. The framework depends on modeling the conditional distribution of inter-event times with a mixture of log-normals satisfying a Markov property and the conditional probability mass function for the marks with a Transformer-based architecture. The proposed method attains state-of-the-art performance in predicting the next event of a sequence given its history. The experiments also reveal the efficacy of the methods that do not rely on the thinning algorithm during inference over the ones they do. Finally, we test our method on the challenging long-horizon prediction task and find that it outperforms a baseline developed specifically for tackling this task; importantly, inference requires just a fraction of time compared to the thinning-based baseline. Aristeidis Panos |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2023 | Scalable marked point processes for exchangeable and non-exchangeable event sequencesabstractWe adopt the interpretability offered by a parametric, Hawkes-process-inspired conditional probability mass function for the marks and apply variational inference techniques to derive a general and scalable inferential framework for marked point processes. The framework can handle both exchangeable and non-exchangeable event sequences with minimal tuning and without any pre-training. This contrasts with many parametric and non-parametric state-of-the-art methods that typically require pre-training and/or careful tuning, and can only handle exchangeable event sequences. The framework’s competitive computational and predictive performance against other state-of-the-art methods are illustrated through real data experiments. Its attractiveness for large-scale applications is demonstrated through a case study involving all events occurring in an English Premier League season. Aristeidis Panos, Ioannis Kosmidis, Petros Dellaportas |
AISTATS | 1 |
| 2023 | First Session Adaptation: A Strong Replay-Free Baseline for Class-Incremental LearningabstractIn Class-Incremental Learning (CIL) an image classification system is exposed to new classes in each learning session and must be updated incrementally. Methods approaching this problem have updated both the classification head and the feature extractor body at each session of CIL. In this work, we develop a baseline method, First Session Adaptation (FSA), that sheds light on the efficacy of existing CIL approaches, and allows us to assess the relative performance contributions from head and body adaption. FSA adapts a pre-trained neural network body only on the first learning session and fixes it thereafter; a head based on linear discriminant analysis (LDA), is then placed on top of the adapted body, allowing exact updates through CIL. FSA is replay-free i.e. it does not memorize examples from previous sessions of continual learning. To empirically motivate FSA, we first consider a diverse selection of 22 image-classification datasets, evaluating different heads and body adaptation techniques in high/low-shot offline settings. We find that the LDA head performs well and supports CIL out-of-the-box. We also find that Featurewise Layer Modulation (FiLM) adapters are highly effective in the few-shot setting, and full-body adaption in the high-shot setting. Second, we empirically investigate various CIL settings including high-shot CIL and few-shot CIL, including settings that have previously been used in the literature. We show that FSA significantly improves over the state-of-the-art in 15 of the 16 settings considered. FSA with FiLM adapters is especially performant in the few-shot setting. These results indicate that current approaches to continuous body adaptation are not working as expected. Finally, we propose a measure that can be applied to a set of unlabelled inputs which is predictive of the benefits of body adaptation. Aristeidis Panos, Yuriko Kobe, Daniel Olmeda Reino, Rahaf Aljundi, Richard E. Turner |
ICCV | 1 |
| 2022 | How Good Are Low-Rank Approximations in Gaussian Process Regression?abstractWe provide guarantees for approximate Gaussian Process (GP) regression resulting from two common low-rank kernel approximations: based on random Fourier features, and based on truncating the kernel's Mercer expansion. In particular, we bound the Kullback–Leibler divergence between an exact GP and one resulting from one of the afore-described low-rank approximations to its kernel, as well as between their corresponding predictive densities, and we also bound the error between predictive mean vectors and between predictive covariance matrices computed using the exact versus using the approximate GP. We provide experiments on both simulated data and standard benchmarks to evaluate the effectiveness of our theoretical bounds. Constantinos Daskalakis, Petros Dellaportas, Aristeidis Panos |
AAAI | 3 |
| 2021 | Large scale multi-label learning using Gaussian processesabstractAbstract We introduce a Gaussian process latent factor model for multi-label classification that can capture correlations among class labels by using a small set of latent Gaussian process functions. To address computational challenges, when the number of training instances is very large, we introduce several techniques based on variational sparse Gaussian process approximations and stochastic optimization. Specifically, we apply doubly stochastic variational inference that sub-samples data instances and classes which allows us to cope with Big Data. Furthermore, we show it is possible and beneficial to optimize over inducing points, using gradient-based methods, even in very high dimensional input spaces involving up to hundreds of thousands of dimensions. We demonstrate the usefulness of our approach on several real-world large-scale multi-label learning problems. Aristeidis Panos, Petros Dellaportas, Michalis K. Titsias |
Mach. Learn. | 1 |