Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Vinay V. Ramasesh
dblp:270/1730 · also Vinay Venkatesh Ramasesh
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
2as first author
6since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 2 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 |
Language models and text generation · 36% Deep learning architectures and training · 20% Learning paradigms · 18% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 17, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Learning paradigms › continual learning
catastrophic forgetting |
1.1 | 2 | 2022 | Effect of scale on catastrophic forgetting in neural networks · ICLR 2022 Anatomy of Catastrophic Forgetting: Hidden Representations and Task Semantics · ICLR 2021 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
in-context learning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Exploring Length Generalization in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2022 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › compositional generalization
length generalization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Exploring Length Generalization in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2022 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › mathematical reasoning
mathematical problem solving |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models · NeurIPS 2022 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › mathematical reasoning
numerical reasoning |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › encoder-decoder architecture
attention-based encoder-decoder |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Understanding How Encoder-Decoder Architectures Attend · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
attention mechanism |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Understanding How Encoder-Decoder Architectures Attend · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
recurrent neural network |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The geometry of integration in text classification RNNs · ICLR 2021 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
representation analysis |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Anatomy of Catastrophic Forgetting: Hidden Representations and Task Semantics · ICLR 2021 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning
representation geometry |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The geometry of integration in text classification RNNs · ICLR 2021 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › language modeling › language model architecture
sequence-to-sequence model |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Understanding How Encoder-Decoder Architectures Attend · NeurIPS 2021 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
text classification |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | The geometry of integration in text classification RNNs · ICLR 2021 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
continual learning |
0.3 | 2 | 2022 | Effect of scale on catastrophic forgetting in neural networks · ICLR 2022 Anatomy of Catastrophic Forgetting: Hidden Representations and Task Semantics · ICLR 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
out-of-distribution generalization |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Exploring Length Generalization in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
pre-training |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models · NeurIPS 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
scratchpad prompting · 0.6scaling analysis · 0.6large language model pre-training · 0.6fine-tuning · 0.6chain-of-thought prompting · 0.6representation analysis · 0.5hidden state decomposition · 0.5dynamical systems analysis · 0.5attention visualization · 0.5RNN · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Effect of scale on catastrophic forgetting in neural networks
Vinay V. Ramasesh, Aitor Lewkowycz, Ethan Dyer |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2022 | Exploring Length Generalization in Large Language ModelsabstractThe ability to extrapolate from short problem instances to longer ones is an important form of out-of-distribution generalization in reasoning tasks, and is crucial when learning from datasets where longer problem instances are rare. These include theorem proving, solving quantitative mathematics problems, and reading/summarizing novels. In this paper, we run careful empirical studies exploring the length generalization capabilities of transformer-based language models. We first establish that naively finetuning transformers on length generalization tasks shows significant generalization deficiencies independent of model scale. We then show that combining pretrained large language models' in-context learning abilities with scratchpad prompting (asking the model to output solution steps before producing an answer) results in a dramatic improvement in length generalization. We run careful failure analyses on each of the learning modalities and identify common sources of mistakes that highlight opportunities in equipping language models with the ability to generalize to longer problems. Cem Anil, Yuhuai Wu, Anders Andreassen, Aitor Lewkowycz, Vedant Misra, Vinay V. Ramasesh, Ambrose Slone, Guy Gur-Ari, Ethan Dyer, Behnam Neyshabur |
NeurIPS | 6 |
| 2022 | Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language ModelsabstractLanguage models have achieved remarkable performance on a wide range of tasks that require natural language understanding. Nevertheless, state-of-the-art models have generally struggled with tasks that require quantitative reasoning, such as solving mathematics, science, and engineering questions at the college level. To help close this gap, we introduce Minerva, a large language model pretrained on general natural language data and further trained on technical content. The model achieves strong performance in a variety of evaluations, including state-of-the-art performance on the MATH dataset. We also evaluate our model on over two hundred undergraduate-level problems in physics, biology, chemistry, economics, and other sciences that require quantitative reasoning, and find that the model can correctly answer nearly a quarter of them. Aitor Lewkowycz, Anders Andreassen, David Dohan, Ethan Dyer, Henryk Michalewski, Vinay V. Ramasesh, Ambrose Slone, Cem Anil, Imanol Schlag, Theo Gutman-Solo, Yuhuai Wu, Behnam Neyshabur, Guy Gur-Ari, Vedant Misra |
NeurIPS | 6 |
| 2021 | The geometry of integration in text classification RNNs
Kyle Aitken, Vinay V. Ramasesh, Ankush Garg, David Sussillo, Niru Maheswaranathan |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2021 | Anatomy of Catastrophic Forgetting: Hidden Representations and Task Semantics
Vinay V. Ramasesh, Ethan Dyer, Maithra Raghu |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2021 | Understanding How Encoder-Decoder Architectures AttendabstractEncoder-decoder networks with attention have proven to be a powerful way to solve many sequence-to-sequence tasks. In these networks, attention aligns encoder and decoder states and is often used for visualizing network behavior. However, the mechanisms used by networks to generate appropriate attention matrices are still mysterious. Moreover, how these mechanisms vary depending on the particular architecture used for the encoder and decoder (recurrent, feed-forward, etc.) are also not well understood. In this work, we investigate how encoder-decoder networks solve different sequence-to-sequence tasks. We introduce a way of decomposing hidden states over a sequence into temporal (independent of input) and input-driven (independent of sequence position) components. This reveals how attention matrices are formed: depending on the task requirements, networks rely more heavily on either the temporal or input-driven components. These findings hold across both recurrent and feed-forward architectures despite their differences in forming the temporal components. Overall, our results provide new insight into the inner workings of attention-based encoder-decoder networks. Kyle Aitken, Vinay V. Ramasesh, Niru Maheswaranathan |
NeurIPS | 2 |