Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ann He
dblp:238/1405
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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
1 paper |
Learning paradigms · 33% Trustworthy machine learning · 33% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › crowdsourced annotation
crowdsourced label aggregation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learning Dependency Structures for Weak Supervision Models · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › graphical models › structure learning
dependency structure learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learning Dependency Structures for Weak Supervision Models · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
weakly supervised learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learning Dependency Structures for Weak Supervision Models · ICML 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
structure learning · 0.4robust PCA · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Comparison of segmentation-free and segmentation-dependent computer-aided diagnosis of breast masses on a public mammography datasetabstractPURPOSE: To compare machine learning methods for classifying mass lesions on mammography images that use predefined image features computed over lesion segmentations to those that leverage segmentation-free representation learning on a standard, public evaluation dataset. METHODS: We apply several classification algorithms to the public Curated Breast Imaging Subset of the Digital Database for Screening Mammography (CBIS-DDSM), in which each image contains a mass lesion. Segmentation-free representation learning techniques for classifying lesions as benign or malignant include both a Bag-of-Visual-Words (BoVW) method and a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). We compare classification performance of these techniques to that obtained using two different segmentation-dependent approaches from the literature that rely on specific combinations of end classifiers (e.g. linear discriminant analysis, neural networks) and predefined features computed over the lesion segmentation (e.g. spiculation measure, morphological characteristics, intensity metrics). RESULTS: values of 0.73 for a segmentation-free BoVW method, 0.86 for a segmentation-free CNN method, 0.75 for a segmentation-dependent linear discriminant analysis of Rubber-Band Straightening Transform features, and 0.58 for a hybrid rule-based neural network classification using a small number of hand-designed features. CONCLUSIONS: We find that malignancy classification performance on the CBIS-DDSM dataset using segmentation-free BoVW features is comparable to that of the best segmentation-dependent methods we study, but also observe that a common segmentation-free CNN model substantially and significantly outperforms each of these (p < 0.05). These results reinforce recent findings suggesting that representation learning techniques such as BoVW and CNNs are advantageous for mammogram analysis because they do not require lesion segmentation, the quality and specific characteristics of which can vary substantially across datasets. We further observe that segmentation-dependent methods achieve performance levels on CBIS-DDSM inferior to those achieved on the original evaluation datasets reported in the literature. Each of these findings reinforces the need for standardization of datasets, segmentation techniques, and model implementations in performance assessments of automated classifiers for medical imaging. Rebecca Sawyer Lee, Jared Dunnmon, Ann He, Siyi Tang, Christopher Ré, Daniel L. Rubin |
J. Biomed. Informatics | 3 |
| 2019 | Learning Dependency Structures for Weak Supervision ModelsabstractLabeling training data is a key bottleneck in the modern machine learning pipeline. Recent weak supervision approaches combine labels from multiple noisy sources by estimating their accuracies without access to ground truth labels; however, estimating the dependencies among these sources is a critical challenge. We focus on a robust PCA-based algorithm for learning these dependency structures, establish improved theoretical recovery rates, and outperform existing methods on various real-world tasks. Under certain conditions, we show that the amount of unlabeled data needed can scale sublinearly or even logarithmically with the number of sources m, improving over previous efforts that ignore the sparsity pattern in the dependency structure and scale linearly in m. We provide an information-theoretic lower bound on the minimum sample complexity of the weak supervision setting. Our method outperforms weak supervision approaches that assume conditionally-independent sources by up to 4.64 F1 points and previous structure learning approaches by up to 4.41 F1 points on real-world relation extraction and image classification tasks. Paroma Varma, Frederic Sala, Ann He, Alexander Ratner, Christopher Ré |
ICML | 3 |