EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Suraj Anand
dblp:240/8600
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 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 |
Representation and self-supervised learning · 50% Language models and text generation · 25% Deep learning architectures and training · 25% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
in-context learning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Dual Process Learning: Controlling Use of In-Context vs. In-Weights Strategies with Weight Forgetting · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
in-weights learning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Dual Process Learning: Controlling Use of In-Context vs. In-Weights Strategies with Weight Forgetting · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
pre-training |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Dual Process Learning: Controlling Use of In-Context vs. In-Weights Strategies with Weight Forgetting · ICLR 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
pretraining modulation · 0.9active forgetting · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Dual Process Learning: Controlling Use of In-Context vs. In-Weights Strategies with Weight ForgettingabstractLanguage models have the ability to perform in-context learning (ICL), allowing them to flexibly adapt their behavior based on context. This contrasts with in-weights learning (IWL), where memorized information is encoded in model parameters after iterated observations of data. An ideal model should be able to flexibly deploy both of these abilities. Despite their apparent ability to learn in-context, language models are known to struggle when faced with unseen or rarely seen tokens (Land & Bartolo, 2024). Hence, we study $\textbf{structural in-context learning}$, which we define as the ability of a model to execute in-context learning on arbitrary novel tokens -- so called because the model must generalize on the basis of e.g. sentence structure or task structure, rather than content encoded in token embeddings. We study structural in-context algorithms on both synthetic and naturalistic tasks using toy models, masked language models, and autoregressive language models. We find that structural ICL appears before quickly disappearing early in LM pretraining. While it has been shown that ICL can diminish during training (Singh et al., 2023), we find that prior work does not account for structural ICL. Building on Chen et al. (2024) 's active forgetting method, we introduce pretraining and finetuning methods that can modulate the preference for structural ICL and IWL. Importantly, this allows us to induce a $\textit{dual process strategy}$ where in-context and in-weights solutions coexist within a single model. Suraj Anand, Michael A. Lepori, Jack Merullo, Ellie Pavlick |
ICLR | 1 |