EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Lukas Muttenthaler
dblp:245/4369
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
4as first author
6since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 4 first-author · 6 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 |
Representation and self-supervised learning · 44% Transfer learning and domain adaptation · 14% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 12% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 17, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation analysis
representation similarity |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Objective drives the consistency of representational similarity across datasets · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning › self-supervised representation learning › self-supervised visual representation learning
self-supervised vision model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Objective drives the consistency of representational similarity across datasets · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
calibration |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Set Learning for Accurate and Calibrated Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
cross-task transfer |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | When does perceptual alignment benefit vision representations? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Computer vision › 3D vision › geometric deep learning
set learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Set Learning for Accurate and Calibrated Models · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning
visual representation learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | When does perceptual alignment benefit vision representations? · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation matching
feature alignment |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Improving neural network representations using human similarity judgments · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
few-shot learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Improving neural network representations using human similarity judgments · NeurIPS 2023 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › alignment
human alignment |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Human alignment of neural network representations · ICLR 2023 |
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
human similarity judgment |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Improving neural network representations using human similarity judgments · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
approximate bayesian inference |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | VICE: Variational Interpretable Concept Embeddings · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › embedding learning › semantic embedding
concept embedding |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | VICE: Variational Interpretable Concept Embeddings · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › embedding learning
interpretable embedding |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | VICE: Variational Interpretable Concept Embeddings · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | VICE: Variational Interpretable Concept Embeddings · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Improving neural network representations using human similarity judgments · NeurIPS 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
representational similarity analysis · 1.5variational inference · 1.1PAC learning bound · 1.1triplet learning · 0.8odd-k-out learning · 0.8human similarity judgment finetuning · 0.8cross-entropy minimization · 0.8linear alignment · 0.7global-local transform · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Objective drives the consistency of representational similarity across datasetsabstractThe Platonic Representation Hypothesis claims that recent foundation models are converging to a shared representation space as a function of their downstream task performance, irrespective of the objectives and data modalities used to train these models (Huh et al., 2024). Representational similarity is generally measured for individual datasets and is not necessarily consistent across datasets. Thus, one may wonder whether this convergence of model representations is confounded by the datasets commonly used in machine learning. Here, we propose a systematic way to measure how representational similarity between models varies with the set of stimuli used to construct the representations. We find that the objective function is a crucial factor in determining the consistency of representational similarities across datasets. Specifically, self-supervised vision models learn representations whose relative pairwise similarities generalize better from one dataset to another compared to those of image classification or image-text models. Moreover, the correspondence between representational similarities and the models’ task behavior is dataset-dependent, being most strongly pronounced for single-domain datasets. Our work provides a framework for analyzing similarities of model representations across datasets and linking those similarities to differences in task behavior. Laure Ciernik, Lorenz Linhardt, Marco Morik, Jonas Dippel, Simon Kornblith, Lukas Muttenthaler |
ICML | 6 |
| 2024 | Set Learning for Accurate and Calibrated ModelsabstractModel overconfidence and poor calibration are common in machine learning and difficult to account for when applying standard empirical risk minimization. In this work, we propose a novel method to alleviate these problems that we call odd-$k$-out learning (OKO), which minimizes the cross-entropy error for sets rather than for single examples. This naturally allows the model to capture correlations across data examples and achieves both better accuracy and calibration, especially in limited training data and class-imbalanced regimes. Perhaps surprisingly, OKO often yields better calibration even when training with hard labels and dropping any additional calibration parameter tuning, such as temperature scaling. We demonstrate this in extensive experimental analyses and provide a mathematical theory to interpret our findings. We emphasize that OKO is a general framework that can be easily adapted to many settings and a trained model can be applied to single examples at inference time, without significant run-time overhead or architecture changes. Lukas Muttenthaler, Robert A. Vandermeulen, Qiuyi Zhang 0001, Thomas Unterthiner, Klaus-Robert Müller |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2024 | When does perceptual alignment benefit vision representations?abstractHumans judge perceptual similarity according to diverse visual attributes, including scene layout, subject location, and camera pose. Existing vision models understand a wide range of semantic abstractions but improperly weigh these attributes and thus make inferences misaligned with human perception.
While vision representations have previously benefited from human preference alignment in contexts like image generation, the utility of perceptually aligned representations in more general-purpose settings remains unclear. Here, we investigate how aligning vision model representations to human perceptual judgments impacts their usability in standard computer vision tasks. We finetune state-of-the-art models on a dataset of human similarity judgments for synthetic image triplets and evaluate them across diverse computer vision tasks. We find that aligning models to perceptual judgments yields representations that improve upon the original backbones across many downstream tasks, including counting, semantic segmentation, depth estimation, instance retrieval, and retrieval-augmented generation. In addition, we find that performance is widely preserved on other tasks, including specialized out-of-distribution domains such as in medical imaging and 3D environment frames. Our results suggest that injecting an inductive bias about human perceptual knowledge into vision models can make them better representation learners. Shobhita Sundaram, Stephanie Fu, Lukas Muttenthaler, Netanel Tamir, Lucy Chai, Simon Kornblith, Trevor Darrell, Phillip Isola |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2023 | Human alignment of neural network representations
Lukas Muttenthaler, Jonas Dippel, Lorenz Linhardt, Robert A. Vandermeulen, Simon Kornblith |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2023 | Improving neural network representations using human similarity judgmentsabstractDeep neural networks have reached human-level performance on many computer vision tasks. However, the objectives used to train these networks enforce only that similar images are embedded at similar locations in the representation space, and do not directly constrain the global structure of the resulting space. Here, we explore the impact of supervising this global structure by linearly aligning it with human similarity judgments. We find that a naive approach leads to large changes in local representational structure that harm downstream performance. Thus, we propose a novel method that aligns the global structure of representations while preserving their local structure. This global-local transform considerably improves accuracy across a variety of few-shot learning and anomaly detection tasks. Our results indicate that human visual representations are globally organized in a way that facilitates learning from few examples, and incorporating this global structure into neural network representations improves performance on downstream tasks. Lukas Muttenthaler, Lorenz Linhardt, Jonas Dippel, Robert A. Vandermeulen, Katherine L. Hermann, Andrew K. Lampinen, Simon Kornblith |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2022 | VICE: Variational Interpretable Concept EmbeddingsabstractA central goal in the cognitive sciences is the development of numerical models for mental representations of object concepts. This paper introduces Variational Interpretable Concept Embeddings (VICE), an approximate Bayesian method for embedding object concepts in a vector space using data collected from humans in a triplet odd-one-out task. VICE uses variational inference to obtain sparse, non-negative representations of object concepts with uncertainty estimates for the embedding values. These estimates are used to automatically select the dimensions that best explain the data. We derive a PAC learning bound for VICE that can be used to estimate generalization performance or determine a sufficient sample size for experimental design. VICE rivals or outperforms its predecessor, SPoSE, at predicting human behavior in the triplet odd-one-out task. Furthermore, VICE's object representations are more reproducible and consistent across random initializations, highlighting the unique advantage of using VICE for deriving interpretable embeddings from human behavior. Lukas Muttenthaler, Charles Zheng 0001, Patrick McClure, Robert A. Vandermeulen, Martin N. Hebart, Francisco Pereira 0001 |
NeurIPS | 1 |