Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Andre Stechert
dblp:49/2837
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1999
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2
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
1 paper |
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
heuristic search |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | On Efficient Heuristic Ranking of Hypotheses · NIPS 1997 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
hypothesis ranking |
0.0 | 1 | 1997 | On Efficient Heuristic Ranking of Hypotheses · NIPS 1997 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
heuristic ranking · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1999 | Efficient Heuristic Hypothesis RankingabstractThis paper considers the problem of learning the ranking of a set of stochastic alternatives based upon incomplete information (i.e., a limited number of samples). We describe a system that, at each decision cycle, outputs either a complete ordering on the hypotheses or decides to gather additional information (i.e., observations) at some cost. The ranking problem is a generalization of the previously studied hypothesis selection problem - in selection, an algorithm must select the single best hypothesis, while in ranking, an algorithm must order all the hypotheses. The central problem we address is achieving the desired ranking quality while minimizing the cost of acquiring additional samples. We describe two algorithms for hypothesis ranking and their application for the probably approximately correct (PAC) and expected loss (EL) learning criteria. Empirical results are provided to demonstrate the effectiveness of these ranking procedures on both synthetic and real-world datasets. Steve A. Chien, Andre Stechert, Darren Mutz |
J. Artif. Intell. Res. | 2 |
| 1997 | On Efficient Heuristic Ranking of Hypotheses
Steve A. Chien, Andre Stechert, Darren Mutz |
NIPS | 2 |