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

Robert Allison

dblp:334/1814 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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
2 papers
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 69% Kernel, tree and ensemble methods · 25% Trustworthy machine learning · 6%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › distribution approximation
distribution compression
0.912025
Conditional Distribution Compression via the Kernel Conditional Mean Embedding · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods
kernel methods
0.912025
Conditional Distribution Compression via the Kernel Conditional Mean Embedding · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process
gaussian process regression
0.712023
Leveraging Locality and Robustness to Achieve Massively Scalable Gaussian Process Regression · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation
uncertainty calibration
0.212023
Leveraging Locality and Robustness to Achieve Massively Scalable Gaussian Process Regression · NeurIPS 2023

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

kernel inducing points · 0.9kernel herding · 0.9kernel conditional mean embedding · 0.9richardson-romberg extrapolation · 0.7infinitesimal generator comparison · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Conditional Distribution Compression via the Kernel Conditional Mean Embedding
abstract
Existing distribution compression methods, like Kernel Herding (KH), were originally developed for unlabelled data. However, no existing approach directly compresses the conditional distribution of *labelled* data. To address this gap, we first introduce the *Average Maximum Conditional Mean Discrepancy* (AMCMD), a metric for comparing conditional distributions, and derive a closed form estimator. Next, we make a key observation: in the context of distribution compression, the cost of constructing a compressed set targeting the AMCMD can be reduced from $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$ to $\mathcal{O}(n)$. Leveraging this, we extend KH to propose *Average Conditional Kernel Herding* (ACKH), a linear-time greedy algorithm for constructing compressed sets that target the AMCMD. To better understand the advantages of *directly* compressing the conditional distribution rather than doing so via the joint distribution, we introduce *Joint Kernel Herding* (JKH), an adaptation of KH designed to compress the joint distribution of labelled data. While herding methods provide a simple and interpretable selection process, they rely on a greedy heuristic. To explore alternative optimisation strategies, we also propose *Joint Kernel Inducing Points* (JKIP) and *Average Conditional Kernel Inducing Points* (ACKIP), which *jointly* optimise the compressed set while maintaining linear complexity. Experiments show that directly preserving conditional distributions with ACKIP outperforms both joint distribution compression and the greedy selection used in ACKH. Moreover, we see that JKIP consistently outperforms JKH.
Dominic Broadbent, Nick Whiteley, Robert Allison, Tom Lovett
NeurIPS3
2023 Leveraging Locality and Robustness to Achieve Massively Scalable Gaussian Process Regression
abstract
The accurate predictions and principled uncertainty measures provided by GP regression incur $O(n^3)$ cost which is prohibitive for modern-day large-scale applications. This has motivated extensive work on computationally efficient approximations. We introduce a new perspective by exploring robustness properties and limiting behaviour of GP nearest-neighbour (GPnn) prediction. We demonstrate through theory and simulation that as the data-size $n$ increases, accuracy of estimated parameters and GP model assumptions become increasingly irrelevant to GPnn predictive accuracy. Consequently, it is sufficient to spend small amounts of work on parameter estimation in order to achieve high MSE accuracy, even in the presence of gross misspecification. In contrast, as $n \rightarrow \infty$, uncertainty calibration and NLL are shown to remain sensitive to just one parameter, the additive noise-variance; but we show that this source of inaccuracy can be corrected for, thereby achieving both well-calibrated uncertainty measures and accurate predictions at remarkably low computational cost. We exhibit a very simple GPnn regression algorithm with stand-out performance compared to other state-of-the-art GP approximations as measured on large UCI datasets. It operates at a small fraction of those other methods' training costs, for example on a basic laptop taking about 30 seconds to train on a dataset of size $n = 1.6 \times 10^6$.
Robert Allison, Anthony Stephenson, Samuel F, Edward Pyzer-Knapp
NeurIPS1