Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Thomas Müller 0009
dblp:38/6310-9
· DBLP profile ↗
13ranked-venue papers
7as first author
4since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0002-8360-4189ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 13 · 7 first-author · 4 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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
7 papers |
Information extraction and text analysis · 40% Question answering and dialogue systems · 30% Deep learning architectures and training · 11% |
Topics — the 14 heaviest of 14, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems
table question answering |
0.6 | 2 | 2021 | TaPas: Weakly Supervised Table Parsing via Pre-training · ACL 2020 MATE: Multi-view Attention for Table Transformer Efficiency · EMNLP (1) 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › attention mechanism
sparse attention |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | MATE: Multi-view Attention for Table Transformer Efficiency · EMNLP (1) 2021 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › document understanding
table understanding |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | MATE: Multi-view Attention for Table Transformer Efficiency · EMNLP (1) 2021 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
semantic parsing |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | TaPas: Weakly Supervised Table Parsing via Pre-training · ACL 2020 |
Computer vision › Segmentation and scene understanding › scene parsing
weakly-supervised image parsing |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | TaPas: Weakly Supervised Table Parsing via Pre-training · ACL 2020 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › morphological analysis
morphological tagging |
0.4 | 2 | 2015 | Joint Lemmatization and Morphological Tagging with Lemming · EMNLP 2015 Efficient Higher-Order CRFs for Morphological Tagging · EMNLP 2013 |
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems › interactive question answering
conversational question answering |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Answering Conversational Questions on Structured Data without Logical Forms · EMNLP/IJCNLP (1) 2019 |
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems
question answering over structured data |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Answering Conversational Questions on Structured Data without Logical Forms · EMNLP/IJCNLP (1) 2019 |
Natural language and speech › Machine translation
morphologically rich languages |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | LAMB: A Good Shepherd of Morphologically Rich Languages · EMNLP 2016 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › syntactic parsing
dependency parsing |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Dependency parsing with latent refinements of part-of-speech tags · EMNLP 2014 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › sequence labeling
part-of-speech tagging |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Dependency parsing with latent refinements of part-of-speech tags · EMNLP 2014 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
cross-lingual transfer |
0.1 | 1 | 2016 | LAMB: A Good Shepherd of Morphologically Rich Languages · EMNLP 2016 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › morphological analysis
lemmatization |
0.1 | 1 | 2015 | Joint Lemmatization and Morphological Tagging with Lemming · EMNLP 2015 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured prediction
conditional random field |
0.0 | 1 | 2013 | Efficient Higher-Order CRFs for Morphological Tagging · EMNLP 2013 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
transformer · 0.5sparse attention · 0.5pre-training · 0.4BERT · 0.4log-linear model · 0.2joint modeling · 0.2global features · 0.2split-merge training · 0.2hidden markov model · 0.2approximate inference · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Zero and Few-Shot Learning for Author Profiling
Mara Chinea-Rios, Thomas Müller 0009, Gretel Liz De la Peña Sarracén, Francisco M. Rangel Pardo, Marc Franco-Salvador |
NLDB | 2 |
| 2022 | Active Few-Shot Learning with FASL
Thomas Müller 0009, Guillermo Pérez-Torró, Angelo Basile, Marc Franco-Salvador |
NLDB | 1 |
| 2021 | MATE: Multi-view Attention for Table Transformer EfficiencyabstractThis work presents a sparse-attention Transformer architecture for modeling documents that contain large tables.Tables are ubiquitous on the web, and are rich in information.However, more than 20% of relational tables on the web have 20 or more rows (Cafarella et al., 2008), and these large tables present a challenge for current Transformer models, which are typically limited to 512 tokens.Here we propose MATE, a novel Transformer architecture designed to model the structure of web tables.MATE uses sparse attention in a way that allows heads to efficiently attend to either rows or columns in a table.This architecture scales linearly with respect to speed and memory, and can handle documents containing more than 8000 tokens with current accelerators.MATE also has a more appropriate inductive bias for tabular data, and sets a new state-of-the-art for three table reasoning datasets.For HY-BRIDQA (Chen et al., 2020b), a dataset that involves large documents containing tables, we improve the best prior result by 19 points. Julian Martin Eisenschlos, Maharshi Gor, Thomas Müller 0009, William W. Cohen |
EMNLP (1) | 3 |
| 2021 | Open Domain Question Answering over Tables via Dense RetrievalabstractJonathan Herzig, Thomas Müller, Syrine Krichene, Julian Eisenschlos. Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 2021. Jonathan Herzig, Thomas Müller 0009, Syrine Krichene, Julian Martin Eisenschlos |
NAACL-HLT | 2 |
| 2020 | TaPas: Weakly Supervised Table Parsing via Pre-trainingabstractAnswering natural language questions over tables is usually seen as a semantic parsing task.To alleviate the collection cost of full logical forms, one popular approach focuses on weak supervision consisting of denotations instead of logical forms.However, training semantic parsers from weak supervision poses difficulties, and in addition, the generated logical forms are only used as an intermediate step prior to retrieving the denotation.In this paper, we present TAPAS, an approach to question answering over tables without generating logical forms.TAPAS trains from weak supervision, and predicts the denotation by selecting table cells and optionally applying a corresponding aggregation operator to such selection.TAPAS extends BERT's architecture to encode tables as input, initializes from an effective joint pre-training of text segments and tables crawled from Wikipedia, and is trained end-to-end.We experiment with three different semantic parsing datasets, and find that TAPAS outperforms or rivals semantic parsing models by improving state-of-the-art accuracy on SQA from 55.1 to 67.2 and performing on par with the state-of-the-art on WIKISQL and WIKITQ, but with a simpler model architecture.We additionally find that transfer learning, which is trivial in our setting, from WIK-ISQL to WIKITQ, yields 48.7 accuracy, 4.2 points above the state-of-the-art. Jonathan Herzig, Pawel Krzysztof Nowak, Thomas Müller 0009, Francesco Piccinno, Julian Martin Eisenschlos |
ACL | 3 |
| 2019 | Answering Conversational Questions on Structured Data without Logical FormsabstractThomas Mueller, Francesco Piccinno, Peter Shaw, Massimo Nicosia, Yasemin Altun. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP). 2019. Thomas Müller 0009, Francesco Piccinno, Peter Shaw 0004, Massimo Nicosia, Yasemin Altun |
EMNLP/IJCNLP (1) | 1 |
| 2016 | LAMB: A Good Shepherd of Morphologically Rich Languages
Sebastian Ebert, Thomas Müller 0009, Hinrich Schütze |
EMNLP | 2 |
| 2015 | Labeled Morphological Segmentation with Semi-Markov ModelsabstractWe present labeled morphological segmentation-an alternative view of morphological processing that unifies several tasks.We introduce a new hierarchy of morphotactic tagsets and CHIPMUNK, a discriminative morphological segmentation system that, contrary to previous work, explicitly models morphotactics.We show improved performance on three tasks for all six languages: (i) morphological segmentation, (ii) stemming and (iii) morphological tag classification.For morphological segmentation our method shows absolute improvements of 2-6 points F 1 over a strong baseline. Ryan Cotterell, Thomas Müller 0009, Alexander Fraser 0001, Hinrich Schütze |
CoNLL | 2 |
| 2015 | Joint Lemmatization and Morphological Tagging with LemmingabstractWe present LEMMING, a modular loglinear model that jointly models lemmatization and tagging and supports the integration of arbitrary global features.It is trainable on corpora annotated with gold standard tags and lemmata and does not rely on morphological dictionaries or analyzers.LEMMING sets the new state of the art in token-based statistical lemmatization on six languages; e.g., for Czech lemmatization, we reduce the error by 60%, from 4.05 to 1.58.We also give empirical evidence that jointly modeling morphological tags and lemmata is mutually beneficial. Thomas Müller 0009, Ryan Cotterell, Alexander Fraser 0001, Hinrich Schütze |
EMNLP | 1 |
| 2015 | Robust Morphological Tagging with Word RepresentationsabstractWe present a comparative investigation of word representations for part-of-speech (POS) and morphological tagging, focusing on scenarios with considerable differences between training and test data where a robust approach is necessary.Instead of adapting the model towards a specific domain we aim to build a robust model across domains.We developed a test suite for robust tagging consisting of six languages and different domains.We find that representations similar to Brown clusters perform best for POS tagging and that word representations based on linguistic morphological analyzers perform best for morphological tagging. Thomas Müller 0009, Hinrich Schütze |
HLT-NAACL | 1 |
| 2014 | Dependency parsing with latent refinements of part-of-speech tagsabstractIn this paper we propose a method to increase dependency parser performance without using additional labeled or unlabeled data by refining the layer of predicted part-of-speech (POS) tags. We perform experiments on English and German and show significant improvements for both languages. The refinement is based on generative split-merge training for Hidden Markov models (HMMs). Thomas Müller 0009, Richárd Farkas, Alex Judea, Helmut Schmid, Hinrich Schütze |
EMNLP | 1 |
| 2013 | Efficient Higher-Order CRFs for Morphological TaggingabstractTraining higher-order conditional random fields is prohibitive for huge tag sets.We present an approximated conditional random field using coarse-to-fine decoding and early updating.We show that our implementation yields fast and accurate morphological taggers across six languages with different morphological properties and that across languages higher-order models give significant improvements over 1 st -order models. Thomas Müller 0009, Helmut Schmid, Hinrich Schütze |
EMNLP | 1 |
| 2012 | A Comparative Investigation of Morphological Language Modeling for the Languages of the European Union
Thomas Müller 0009, Hinrich Schütze, Helmut Schmid |
HLT-NAACL | 1 |