Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Nikolaj Thams
dblp:259/3162
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
3as first author
6since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0003-3961-5101ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 3 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
5 papers |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 41% Trustworthy machine learning · 36% Reinforcement learning · 16% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
causal inference |
1.8 | 3 | 2024 | Identifying Causal Effects using Instrumental Time Series: Nuisance IV and Correcting for the Past · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 Invariant Ancestry Search · ICML 2022 Regularizing towards Causal Invariance: Linear Models with Proxies · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
1.6 | 3 | 2022 | Evaluating Robustness to Dataset Shift via Parametric Robustness Sets · NeurIPS 2022 Invariant Ancestry Search · ICML 2022 Regularizing towards Causal Invariance: Linear Models with Proxies · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness › distribution shift
robustness to distribution shift |
0.8 | 2 | 2023 | Evaluating Robustness to Dataset Shift via Parametric Robustness Sets · NeurIPS 2022 Invariant Policy Learning: A Causal Perspective · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › causal inference
instrumental variable regression |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Identifying Causal Effects using Instrumental Time Series: Nuisance IV and Correcting for the Past · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › bandit
contextual bandit |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Invariant Policy Learning: A Causal Perspective · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › bandit › contextual bandit
offline contextual bandit |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Invariant Policy Learning: A Causal Perspective · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2023 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
invariant causal prediction |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Invariant Ancestry Search · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › invariance
causal invariance |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Regularizing towards Causal Invariance: Linear Models with Proxies · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › causal inference
proxy variables |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Regularizing towards Causal Invariance: Linear Models with Proxies · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
graphical models |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Identifying Causal Effects using Instrumental Time Series: Nuisance IV and Correcting for the Past · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
vector autoregressive processes · 0.8nuisance covariates · 0.8graph marginalization · 0.8invariance · 0.7causality · 0.7second-order approximation · 0.6scalable algorithms · 0.6invariance testing · 0.6importance sampling · 0.6causal modeling · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Identifying Causal Effects using Instrumental Time Series: Nuisance IV and Correcting for the PastabstractInstrumental variable (IV) regression relies on instruments to infer causal effects from observational data with unobserved confounding. We consider IV regression in time series models, such as vector auto-regressive (VAR) processes. Direct applications of i.i.d. techniques are generally inconsistent as they do not correctly adjust for dependencies in the past. In this paper, we outline the difficulties that arise due to time structure and propose methodology for constructing identifying equations that can be used for consistent parametric estimation of causal effects in time series data. One method uses extra nuisance covariates to obtain identifiability (an idea that can be of interest even in the i.i.d. case). We further propose a graph marginalization framework that allows us to apply nuisance IV and other IV methods in a principled way to time series. Our methods make use of a version of the global Markov property, which we prove holds for VAR(p) processes. For VAR(1) processes, we prove identifiability conditions that relate to Jordan forms and are different from the well-known rank conditions in the i.i.d. case (they do not require as many instruments as covariates, for example). We provide methods, prove their consistency, and show how the inferred causal effect can be used for distribution generalization. Simulation experiments corroborate our theoretical results. We provide ready-to-use Python code. Nikolaj Thams, Rikke Søndergaard, Sebastian Weichwald, Jonas Peters |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 1 |
| 2024 | Local Independence Testing for Point ProcessesabstractConstraint-based causal structure learning for point processes require empirical tests of local independence. Existing tests require strong model assumptions, e.g., that the true data generating model is a Hawkes process with no latent confounders. Even when restricting attention to Hawkes processes, latent confounders are a major technical difficulty because a marginalized process will generally not be a Hawkes process itself. We introduce an expansion similar to Volterra expansions as a tool to represent marginalized intensities. Our main theoretical result is that such expansions can approximate the true marginalized intensity arbitrarily well. Based on this, we propose a test of local independence and investigate its properties in real and simulated data. Nikolaj Thams, Niels Richard Hansen |
IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst. | 1 |
| 2023 | Invariant Policy Learning: A Causal PerspectiveabstractContextual bandit and reinforcement learning algorithms have been successfully used in various interactive learning systems such as online advertising, recommender systems, and dynamic pricing. However, they have yet to be widely adopted in high-stakes application domains, such as healthcare. One reason may be that existing approaches assume that the underlying mechanisms are static in the sense that they do not change over different environments. In many real-world systems, however, the mechanisms are subject to shifts across environments which may invalidate the static environment assumption. In this paper, we take a step toward tackling the problem of environmental shifts considering the framework of offline contextual bandits. We view the environmental shift problem through the lens of causality and propose multi-environment contextual bandits that allow for changes in the underlying mechanisms. We adopt the concept of invariance from the causality literature and introduce the notion of policy invariance. We argue that policy invariance is only relevant if unobserved variables are present and show that, in that case, an optimal invariant policy is guaranteed to generalize across environments under suitable assumptions. Sorawit Saengkyongam, Nikolaj Thams, Jonas Peters, Niklas Pfister |
IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. | 2 |
| 2022 | Invariant Ancestry SearchabstractRecently, methods have been proposed that exploit the invariance of prediction models with respect to changing environments to infer subsets of the causal parents of a response variable. If the environments influence only few of the underlying mechanisms, the subset identified by invariant causal prediction (ICP), for example, may be small, or even empty. We introduce the concept of minimal invariance and propose invariant ancestry search (IAS). In its population version, IAS outputs a set which contains only ancestors of the response and is a superset of the output of ICP. When applied to data, corresponding guarantees hold asymptotically if the underlying test for invariance has asymptotic level and power. We develop scalable algorithms and perform experiments on simulated and real data. Phillip B. Mogensen, Nikolaj Thams, Jonas Peters |
ICML | 2 |
| 2022 | Evaluating Robustness to Dataset Shift via Parametric Robustness SetsabstractWe give a method for proactively identifying small, plausible shifts in distribution which lead to large differences in model performance. These shifts are defined via parametric changes in the causal mechanisms of observed variables, where constraints on parameters yield a "robustness set" of plausible distributions and a corresponding worst-case loss over the set. While the loss under an individual parametric shift can be estimated via reweighting techniques such as importance sampling, the resulting worst-case optimization problem is non-convex, and the estimate may suffer from large variance. For small shifts, however, we can construct a local second-order approximation to the loss under shift and cast the problem of finding a worst-case shift as a particular non-convex quadratic optimization problem, for which efficient algorithms are available. We demonstrate that this second-order approximation can be estimated directly for shifts in conditional exponential family models, and we bound the approximation error. We apply our approach to a computer vision task (classifying gender from images), revealing sensitivity to shifts in non-causal attributes. Nikolaj Thams, Michael Oberst, David A. Sontag |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2021 | Regularizing towards Causal Invariance: Linear Models with ProxiesabstractWe propose a method for learning linear models whose predictive performance is robust to causal interventions on unobserved variables, when noisy proxies of those variables are available. Our approach takes the form of a regularization term that trades off between in-distribution performance and robustness to interventions. Under the assumption of a linear structural causal model, we show that a single proxy can be used to create estimators that are prediction optimal under interventions of bounded strength. This strength depends on the magnitude of the measurement noise in the proxy, which is, in general, not identifiable. In the case of two proxy variables, we propose a modified estimator that is prediction optimal under interventions up to a known strength. We further show how to extend these estimators to scenarios where additional information about the "test time" intervention is available during training. We evaluate our theoretical findings in synthetic experiments and using real data of hourly pollution levels across several cities in China. Michael Oberst, Nikolaj Thams, Jonas Peters, David A. Sontag |
ICML | 2 |