Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Freddie Bickford Smith

dblp:260/0834 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
3as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 3 first-author · 5 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
Trustworthy machine learning · 38% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 16% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 12%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › model validation
active testing
0.912025
Scaling Up Active Testing to Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation
aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty
0.912025
Rethinking Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty · ICML 2025
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
decision theory
0.912025
Rethinking Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty · ICML 2025
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
label-efficient evaluation
0.912025
Scaling Up Active Testing to Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation
0.912025
Scaling Up Active Testing to Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation
0.912025
Rethinking Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty · ICML 2025
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › deep probabilistic models › bayesian deep learning
bayesian neural networks
0.612022
Continual Learning via Sequential Function-Space Variational Inference · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
continual learning
0.612022
Continual Learning via Sequential Function-Space Variational Inference · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference
functional variational inference
0.612022
Continual Learning via Sequential Function-Space Variational Inference · ICML 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

information theory · 0.9in-context learning · 0.9decision theory · 0.9bootstrap estimation · 0.9sequential variational inference · 0.6bayesian inference · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Rethinking Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty
abstract
The ideas of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty are widely used to reason about the probabilistic predictions of machine-learning models. We identify incoherence in existing discussions of these ideas and suggest this stems from the aleatoric-epistemic view being insufficiently expressive to capture all the distinct quantities that researchers are interested in. To address this we present a decision-theoretic perspective that relates rigorous notions of uncertainty, predictive performance and statistical dispersion in data. This serves to support clearer thinking as the field moves forward. Additionally we provide insights into popular information-theoretic quantities, showing they can be poor estimators of what they are often purported to measure, while also explaining how they can still be useful in guiding data acquisition.
Freddie Bickford Smith, Jannik Kossen, Eleanor Trollope, Mark van der Wilk, Adam Foster 0001, Tom Rainforth
ICML1
2025 Scaling Up Active Testing to Large Language Models
abstract
Active testing enables label-efficient evaluation of predictive models through careful data acquisition, but it can pose a significant computational cost. We identify cost-saving measures that enable active testing to be scaled up to large language models (LLMs). In particular we show that the surrogate model used to guide data acquisition can be constructed cheaply using in-context learning, does not require updating within an active-testing loop, and can be smaller than the target model. We even find we can make good data-acquisition decisions without making predictions with the target model. As a result we are able to achieve much more accurate evaluations of LLM performance relative to using randomly acquired data. We additionally introduce a bootstrap estimator of evaluation error, which we show to be a useful indicator of how well active testing is working within a single run.
Gabrielle Berrada, Jannik Kossen, Freddie Bickford Smith, Muhammed Razzak, Yarin Gal, Tom Rainforth
NeurIPS3
2024 Making Better Use of Unlabelled Data in Bayesian Active Learning
abstract
Fully supervised models are predominant in Bayesian active learning. We argue that their neglect of the information present in unlabelled data harms not just predictive performance but also decisions about what data to acquire. Our proposed solution is a simple framework for semi-supervised Bayesian active learning. We find it produces better-performing models than either conventional Bayesian active learning or semi-supervised learning with randomly acquired data. It is also easier to scale up than the conventional approach. As well as supporting a shift towards semi-supervised models, our findings highlight the importance of studying models and acquisition methods in conjunction.
Freddie Bickford Smith, Adam Foster 0001, Tom Rainforth
AISTATS1
2023 Prediction-Oriented Bayesian Active Learning
Freddie Bickford Smith, Andreas Kirsch 0002, Sebastian Farquhar, Yarin Gal, Adam Foster 0001, Tom Rainforth
AISTATS1
2022 Continual Learning via Sequential Function-Space Variational Inference
abstract
Sequential Bayesian inference over predictive functions is a natural framework for continual learning from streams of data. However, applying it to neural networks has proved challenging in practice. Addressing the drawbacks of existing techniques, we propose an optimization objective derived by formulating continual learning as sequential function-space variational inference. In contrast to existing methods that regularize neural network parameters directly, this objective allows parameters to vary widely during training, enabling better adaptation to new tasks. Compared to objectives that directly regularize neural network predictions, the proposed objective allows for more flexible variational distributions and more effective regularization. We demonstrate that, across a range of task sequences, neural networks trained via sequential function-space variational inference achieve better predictive accuracy than networks trained with related methods while depending less on maintaining a set of representative points from previous tasks.
Tim G. J. Rudner, Freddie Bickford Smith, Qixuan Feng, Yee Whye Teh, Yarin Gal
ICML2