Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Michael Munn
dblp:267/5343
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 2 first-author · 3 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
4 papers |
Deep learning architectures and training · 29% Representation and self-supervised learning · 28% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 10% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Machine learning and data management · 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
pre-training |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | A Bayesian Model Selection Criterion for Selecting Pretraining Checkpoints · ICML 2025 The Impact of Geometric Complexity on Neural Collapse in Transfer Learning · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
bayesian model selection |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | A Bayesian Model Selection Criterion for Selecting Pretraining Checkpoints · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
checkpoint selection |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | A Bayesian Model Selection Criterion for Selecting Pretraining Checkpoints · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
neural collapse |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | The Impact of Geometric Complexity on Neural Collapse in Transfer Learning · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning
representation geometry |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | The Impact of Geometric Complexity on Neural Collapse in Transfer Learning · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
implicit regularization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Why neural networks find simple solutions: The many regularizers of geometric complexity · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
regularization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Why neural networks find simple solutions: The many regularizers of geometric complexity · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
generative adversarial network |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | COT-GAN: Generating Sequential Data via Causal Optimal Transport · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling › generative model
sequential data generation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | COT-GAN: Generating Sequential Data via Causal Optimal Transport · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning and data management
optimal transport |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | COT-GAN: Generating Sequential Data via Causal Optimal Transport · NeurIPS 2020 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
fine-tuning |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | A Bayesian Model Selection Criterion for Selecting Pretraining Checkpoints · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
foundation model |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | A Bayesian Model Selection Criterion for Selecting Pretraining Checkpoints · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
few-shot learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | The Impact of Geometric Complexity on Neural Collapse in Transfer Learning · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical learning theory
complexity control |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Why neural networks find simple solutions: The many regularizers of geometric complexity · NeurIPS 2022 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › heuristic search › heuristic generation
heuristic learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Why neural networks find simple solutions: The many regularizers of geometric complexity · NeurIPS 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
free energy · 0.9bayesian model selection · 0.9sinkhorn divergence · 0.9entropic regularization · 0.9adversarial training · 0.9loss surface analysis · 0.8theoretical analysis · 0.6empirical study · 0.6dirichlet energy · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | A Bayesian Model Selection Criterion for Selecting Pretraining CheckpointsabstractRecent advances in artificial intelligence have been fueled by the development of foundation models such as BERT, GPT, T5, and Vision Transformers. These models are first pretrained on vast and diverse datasets and then adapted to specific downstream tasks, often with significantly less data. However, the mechanisms behind the success of this ubiquitous pretrain-then-adapt paradigm remain underexplored, particularly the characteristics of pretraining checkpoints that enhance downstream adaptation. We introduce a Bayesian model selection criterion, called the downstream free energy, which quantifies a checkpoint’s adaptability by measuring the concentration of nearby favorable parameters for a downstream task. We demonstrate that this Bayesian model selection criterion can be effectively implemented without access to the downstream data or prior knowledge of the downstream task. Furthermore, we provide empirical evidence that the criterion reliably correlates with improved fine-tuning performance, offering a principled approach to predicting model adaptability. Michael Munn, Susan Wei |
ICML | 1 |
| 2024 | The Impact of Geometric Complexity on Neural Collapse in Transfer LearningabstractMany of the recent advances in computer vision and language models can be attributed to the success of transfer learning via the pre-training of large foundation models. However, a theoretical framework which explains this empirical success is incomplete and remains an active area of research. Flatness of the loss surface and neural collapse have recently emerged as useful pre-training metrics which shed light on the implicit biases underlying pre-training. In this paper, we explore the geometric complexity of a model's learned representations as a fundamental mechanism that relates these two concepts. We show through experiments and theory that mechanisms which affect the geometric complexity of the pre-trained network also influence the neural collapse. Furthermore, we show how this effect of the geometric complexity generalizes to the neural collapse of new classes as well, thus encouraging better performance on downstream tasks, particularly in the few-shot setting. Michael Munn, Benoit Dherin, Javier Gonzalvo |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2022 | Why neural networks find simple solutions: The many regularizers of geometric complexityabstractIn many contexts, simpler models are preferable to more complex models and the control of this model complexity is the goal for many methods in machine learning such as regularization, hyperparameter tuning and architecture design. In deep learning, it has been difficult to understand the underlying mechanisms of complexity control, since many traditional measures are not naturally suitable for deep neural networks. Here we develop the notion of geometric complexity, which is a measure of the variability of the model function, computed using a discrete Dirichlet energy. Using a combination of theoretical arguments and empirical results, we show that many common training heuristics such as parameter norm regularization, spectral norm regularization, flatness regularization, implicit gradient regularization, noise regularization and the choice of parameter initialization all act to control geometric complexity, providing a unifying framework in which to characterize the behavior of deep learning models. Benoit Dherin, Michael Munn, Mihaela Rosca, David G. T. Barrett |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2020 | COT-GAN: Generating Sequential Data via Causal Optimal TransportabstractWe introduce COT-GAN, an adversarial algorithm to train implicit generative models optimized for producing sequential data. The loss function of this algorithm is formulated using ideas from Causal Optimal Transport (COT), which combines classic optimal transport methods with an additional temporal causality constraint. Remarkably, we find that this causality condition provides a natural framework to parameterize the cost function that is learned by the discriminator as a robust (worst-case) distance, and an ideal mechanism for learning time dependent data distributions. Following Genevay et al. (2018), we also include an entropic penalization term which allows for the use of the Sinkhorn algorithm when computing the optimal transport cost. Our experiments show effectiveness and stability of COT-GAN when generating both low- and high-dimensional time-series data. The success of the algorithm also relies on a new, improved version of the Sinkhorn divergence which demonstrates less bias in learning. Tianlin Xu, Li Kevin Wenliang, Michael Munn, Beatrice Acciaio |
NeurIPS | 3 |