Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Matteo Chinazzi
dblp:55/11010
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
0as first author
8since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-5955-1929ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 5 · 4 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 4 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 3 · 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 |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 39% Optimization for machine learning · 24% Efficient and distributed learning · 17% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational science and engineering · 100% |
Topics — the 13 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process
neural processes |
1.2 | 2 | 2023 | Deep Bayesian Active Learning for Accelerating Stochastic Simulation · KDD 2023 Multi-fidelity Hierarchical Neural Processes · KDD 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › model-based optimization › bayesian optimization
acquisition function |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Deep Bayesian Active Learning for Accelerating Stochastic Simulation · KDD 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
active learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Disentangled Multi-Fidelity Deep Bayesian Active Learning · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › experimental design › bayesian experimental design
bayesian active learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Deep Bayesian Active Learning for Accelerating Stochastic Simulation · KDD 2023 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › model-based optimization
bayesian optimization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Disentangled Multi-Fidelity Deep Bayesian Active Learning · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › active learning › cost-sensitive active learning
multi-fidelity active learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Disentangled Multi-Fidelity Deep Bayesian Active Learning · ICML 2023 |
Computational science and engineering › scientific machine learning
surrogate modeling |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Disentangled Multi-Fidelity Deep Bayesian Active Learning · ICML 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
gaussian process |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Multi-fidelity Hierarchical Neural Processes · KDD 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models
latent variable model |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Multi-fidelity Hierarchical Neural Processes · KDD 2022 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › model-based optimization › bayesian optimization › surrogate model
multi-fidelity surrogate modeling |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Multi-fidelity Hierarchical Neural Processes · KDD 2022 |
Machine learning › Time series and sequential data › time series modeling
probabilistic forecasting |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Quantifying Uncertainty in Deep Spatiotemporal Forecasting · KDD 2021 |
Machine learning › Time series and sequential data
spatiotemporal forecasting |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Quantifying Uncertainty in Deep Spatiotemporal Forecasting · KDD 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Quantifying Uncertainty in Deep Spatiotemporal Forecasting · KDD 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
gaussian process · 1.3disentangled representation · 1.3deep bayesian active learning · 1.3neural processes · 0.7latent information gain · 0.7bayesian active learning · 0.7neural latent variable model · 0.6multi-fidelity modeling · 0.6frequentist methods · 0.5bayesian methods · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Epydemix: An open-source Python package for epidemic modeling with integrated approximate Bayesian calibrationabstractWe present Epydemix, an open-source Python package for the development and calibration of stochastic compartmental epidemic models. The framework supports flexible model structures that incorporate demographic information, age-stratified contact matrices, and dynamic public health interventions. A key feature of Epydemix is its integration of Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) techniques to perform parameter inference and model calibration through comparison between observed and simulated data. The package offers a range of ABC methods such as simple rejection sampling, simulation-budget-constrained rejection, and Sequential Monte Carlo (ABC-SMC). Epydemix is modular, and supports ABC-based calibration both for models defined within the package and for those developed externally. To demonstrate the computational framework capabilities, we discuss usage examples that include (i) simulating an intervention-driven model with time-varying parameters, and (ii) benchmarking calibration performance using synthetic epidemic data. We further illustrate the use of the package in a retrospective case study that includes scenario projections under alternative intervention assumptions. By lowering the barrier for the implementation of computational and inference approaches, Epydemix makes epidemic modeling more accessible to a wider range of users, from academic researchers to public health professionals. Nicolò Gozzi, Matteo Chinazzi, Jessica T. Davis, Corrado Gioannini, Luca Rossi 0010, Marco Ajelli, Nicola Perra, Alessandro Vespignani |
PLoS Comput. Biol. | 2 |
| 2024 | Challenges of COVID-19 Case Forecasting in the US, 2020-2021abstractDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, forecasting COVID-19 trends to support planning and response was a priority for scientists and decision makers alike. In the United States, COVID-19 forecasting was coordinated by a large group of universities, companies, and government entities led by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub (https://covid19forecasthub.org). We evaluated approximately 9.7 million forecasts of weekly state-level COVID-19 cases for predictions 1-4 weeks into the future submitted by 24 teams from August 2020 to December 2021. We assessed coverage of central prediction intervals and weighted interval scores (WIS), adjusting for missing forecasts relative to a baseline forecast, and used a Gaussian generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to evaluate differences in skill across epidemic phases that were defined by the effective reproduction number. Overall, we found high variation in skill across individual models, with ensemble-based forecasts outperforming other approaches. Forecast skill relative to the baseline was generally higher for larger jurisdictions (e.g., states compared to counties). Over time, forecasts generally performed worst in periods of rapid changes in reported cases (either in increasing or decreasing epidemic phases) with 95% prediction interval coverage dropping below 50% during the growth phases of the winter 2020, Delta, and Omicron waves. Ideally, case forecasts could serve as a leading indicator of changes in transmission dynamics. However, while most COVID-19 case forecasts outperformed a naïve baseline model, even the most accurate case forecasts were unreliable in key phases. Further research could improve forecasts of leading indicators, like COVID-19 cases, by leveraging additional real-time data, addressing performance across phases, improving the characterization of forecast confidence, and ensuring that forecasts were coherent across spatial scales. In the meantime, it is critical for forecast users to appreciate current limitations and use a broad set of indicators to inform pandemic-related decision making. Velma K. Lopez, Estee Y. Cramer, Robert Pagano, John M. Drake, Eamon B. O'Dea, Madeline Adee, Turgay Ayer, Jagpreet Chhatwal, Ozden O. Dalgic, Mary A. Ladd, Benjamin P. Linas, Peter P. Mueller, Jade Xiao, Johannes Bracher, Alvaro J. Castro Rivadeneira, Aaron Gerding, Tilmann Gneiting, Yuxin Huang 0009, Dasuni Jayawardena, Abdul H. Kanji, Khoa Le, Anja Mühlemann, Jarad Niemi, Evan L. Ray, Ariane Stark, Nutcha Wattanachit, Martha W. Zorn, Sen Pei, Jeffrey Shaman, Teresa K. Yamana, Samuel R. Tarasewicz, Daniel J. Wilson 0002, Sid Baccam, Heidi Gurung, Steve Stage, Brad Suchoski, Lei Gao 0011, Zhiling Gu, Myungjin Kim, Guannan Wang, Li Wang 0035, Yueying Wang, Lauren Gardner, Sonia Jindal, Maximilian Marshall, Kristen Nixon, Juan Dent, Alison L. Hill, Joshua Kaminsky, Elizabeth C. Lee, Joseph Chadi Lemaitre, Justin Lessler, Claire P. Smith, Shaun Truelove, Matt Kinsey, Luke C. Mullany, Kaitlin Rainwater-Lovett, Lauren Shin, Katharine Tallaksen, Shelby Wilson, Dean Karlen, Lauren A. Castro, Geoffrey Fairchild, Isaac Michaud, Dave Osthus, Jiang Bian 0002, Wei Cao 0007, Zhifeng Gao, Juan M. Lavista Ferres, Chaozhuo Li, Tie-Yan Liu, Xing Xie 0001, Shun Zheng 0001, Matteo Chinazzi, Jessica T. Davis, Kunpeng Mu, Ana L. Pastore y Piontti, Alessandro Vespignani, Xinyue Xiong, Robert Walraven, Quanquan Gu, Lingxiao Wang 0001, Pan Xu 0002, Difan Zou, Graham Casey Gibson, Daniel Sheldon, Ajitesh Srivastava, Aniruddha Adiga, Benjamin Hurt, Gursharn Kaur, Bryan L. Lewis, Madhav V. Marathe, Akhil Sai Peddireddy, Przemyslaw J. Porebski, Srinivasan Venkatramanan, Lijing Wang 0001, Pragati V. Prasad, Jo W. Walker, Alexander E. Webber, Rachel B. Slayton, Matthew Biggerstaff, Nicholas G. Reich, Michael A. Johansson |
PLoS Comput. Biol. | 78 |
| 2023 | Disentangled Multi-Fidelity Deep Bayesian Active LearningabstractTo balance quality and cost, various domain areas of science and engineering run simulations at multiple levels of sophistication. Multi-fidelity active learning aims to learn a direct mapping from input parameters to simulation outputs at the highest fidelity by actively acquiring data from multiple fidelity levels. However, existing approaches based on Gaussian processes are hardly scalable to high-dimensional data. Deep learning-based methods often impose a hierarchical structure in hidden representations, which only supports passing information from low-fidelity to high-fidelity. These approaches can lead to the undesirable propagation of errors from low-fidelity representations to high-fidelity ones. We propose a novel framework called Disentangled Multi-fidelity Deep Bayesian Active Learning (D-MFDAL), which learns the surrogate models conditioned on the distribution of functions at multiple fidelities. On benchmark tasks of learning deep surrogates of partial differential equations including heat equation, Poisson’s equation and fluid simulations, our approach significantly outperforms state-of-the-art in prediction accuracy and sample efficiency. Dongxia Wu, Ruijia Niu, Matteo Chinazzi, Yi-An Ma, Rose Yu |
ICML | 3 |
| 2023 | Deep Bayesian Active Learning for Accelerating Stochastic SimulationabstractStochastic simulations such as large-scale, spatiotemporal, age-structured epidemic models are computationally expensive at fine-grained resolution. While deep surrogate models can speed up the simulations, doing so for stochastic simulations and with active learning approaches is an underexplored area. We propose Interactive Neural Process (INP), a deep Bayesian active learning framework for learning deep surrogate models to accelerate stochastic simulations. INP consists of two components, a spatiotemporal surrogate model built upon Neural Process (NP) family and an acquisition function for active learning. For surrogate modeling, we develop Spatiotemporal Neural Process (STNP) to mimic the simulator dynamics. For active learning, we propose a novel acquisition function, Latent Information Gain (LIG), calculated in the latent space of NP based models. We perform a theoretical analysis and demonstrate that LIG reduces sample complexity compared with random sampling in high dimensions. We also conduct empirical studies on three complex spatiotemporal simulators for reaction diffusion, heat flow, and infectious disease. The results demonstrate that STNP outperforms the baselines in the offline learning setting and LIG achieves the state-of-the-art for Bayesian active learning. Dongxia Wu, Ruijia Niu, Matteo Chinazzi, Alessandro Vespignani, Yi-An Ma, Rose Yu |
KDD | 3 |
| 2022 | Multi-fidelity Hierarchical Neural ProcessesabstractScience and engineering fields use computer simulation extensively. These simulations are often run at multiple levels of sophistication to balance accuracy and efficiency. Multi-fidelity surrogate modeling reduces the computational cost by fusing different simulation outputs. Cheap data generated from low-fidelity simulators can be combined with limited high-quality data generated by an expensive high-fidelity simulator. Existing methods based on Gaussian processes rely on strong assumptions of the kernel functions and can hardly scale to high-dimensional settings. We propose Multi-fidelity Hierarchical Neural Processes (MF-HNP), a unified neural latent variable model for multi-fidelity surrogate modeling. MF-HNP inherits the flexibility and scalability of Neural Processes. The latent variables transform the correlations among different fidelity levels from observations to latent space. The predictions across fidelities are conditionally independent given the latent states. It helps alleviate the error propagation issue in existing methods. MF-HNP is flexible enough to handle non-nested high dimensional data at different fidelity levels with varying input and output dimensions. We evaluate MF-HNP on epidemiology and climate modeling tasks, achieving competitive performance in terms of accuracy and uncertainty estimation. In contrast to deep Gaussian Processes with only low-dimensional (< 10) tasks, our method shows great promise for speeding up high-dimensional complex simulations (over 7000 for epidemiology modeling and 45000 for climate modeling). Dongxia Wu, Matteo Chinazzi, Alessandro Vespignani, Yi-An Ma, Rose Yu |
KDD | 2 |
| 2022 | Anatomy of the first six months of COVID-19 vaccination campaign in ItalyabstractWe analyze the effectiveness of the first six months of vaccination campaign against SARS-CoV-2 in Italy by using a computational epidemic model which takes into account demographic, mobility, vaccines data, as well as estimates of the introduction and spreading of the more transmissible Alpha variant. We consider six sub-national regions and study the effect of vaccines in terms of number of averted deaths, infections, and reduction in the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) with respect to counterfactual scenarios with the actual non-pharmaceuticals interventions but no vaccine administration. Furthermore, we compare the effectiveness in counterfactual scenarios with different vaccines allocation strategies and vaccination rates. Our results show that, as of 2021/07/05, vaccines averted 29, 350 (IQR: [16, 454-42, 826]) deaths and 4, 256, 332 (IQR: [1, 675, 564-6, 980, 070]) infections and a new pandemic wave in the country. During the same period, they achieved a -22.2% (IQR: [-31.4%; -13.9%]) IFR reduction. We show that a campaign that would have strictly prioritized age groups at higher risk of dying from COVID-19, besides frontline workers and the fragile population, would have implied additional benefits both in terms of avoided fatalities and reduction in the IFR. Strategies targeting the most active age groups would have prevented a higher number of infections but would have been associated with more deaths. Finally, we study the effects of different vaccination intake scenarios by rescaling the number of available doses in the time period under study to those administered in other countries of reference. The modeling framework can be applied to other countries to provide a mechanistic characterization of vaccination campaigns worldwide. Nicolò Gozzi, Matteo Chinazzi, Jessica T. Davis, Kunpeng Mu, Ana L. Pastore y Piontti, Marco Ajelli, Nicola Perra, Alessandro Vespignani |
PLoS Comput. Biol. | 2 |
| 2021 | Quantifying Uncertainty in Deep Spatiotemporal ForecastingabstractDeep learning is gaining increasing popularity for spatiotemporal forecasting. However, prior works have mostly focused on point estimates without quantifying the uncertainty of the predictions. In high stakes domains, being able to generate probabilistic forecasts with confidence intervals is critical to risk assessment and decision making. Hence, a systematic study of uncertainty quantification (UQ) methods for spatiotemporal forecasting is missing in the community. In this paper, we describe two types of spatiotemporal forecasting problems: regular grid-based and graph-based. Then we analyze UQ methods from both the Bayesian and the frequentist point of view, casting in a unified framework via statistical decision theory. Through extensive experiments on real-world road network traffic, epidemics, and air quality forecasting tasks, we reveal the statistical and computational trade-offs for different UQ methods: Bayesian methods are typically more robust in mean prediction, while confidence levels obtained from frequentist methods provide more extensive coverage over data variations. Computationally, quantile regression type methods are cheaper for a single confidence interval but require re-training for different intervals. Sampling based methods generate samples that can form multiple confidence intervals, albeit at a higher computational cost. Dongxia Wu, Liyao Gao, Matteo Chinazzi, Xinyue Xiong, Alessandro Vespignani, Yi-An Ma, Rose Yu |
KDD | 3 |
| 2021 | Estimating the cumulative incidence of COVID-19 in the United States using influenza surveillance, virologic testing, and mortality data: Four complementary approachesabstractEffectively designing and evaluating public health responses to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic requires accurate estimation of the prevalence of COVID-19 across the United States (US). Equipment shortages and varying testing capabilities have however hindered the usefulness of the official reported positive COVID-19 case counts. We introduce four complementary approaches to estimate the cumulative incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 in each state in the US as well as Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, using a combination of excess influenza-like illness reports, COVID-19 test statistics, COVID-19 mortality reports, and a spatially structured epidemic model. Instead of relying on the estimate from a single data source or method that may be biased, we provide multiple estimates, each relying on different assumptions and data sources. Across our four approaches emerges the consistent conclusion that on April 4, 2020, the estimated case count was 5 to 50 times higher than the official positive test counts across the different states. Nationally, our estimates of COVID-19 symptomatic cases as of April 4 have a likely range of 2.3 to 4.8 million, with possibly as many as 7.6 million cases, up to 25 times greater than the cumulative confirmed cases of about 311,000. Extending our methods to May 16, 2020, we estimate that cumulative symptomatic incidence ranges from 4.9 to 10.1 million, as opposed to 1.5 million positive test counts. The proposed combination of approaches may prove useful in assessing the burden of COVID-19 during resurgences in the US and other countries with comparable surveillance systems. Fred S. Lu, André T. Nguyen, Nicholas B. Link, Mathieu Molina, Jessica T. Davis, Matteo Chinazzi, Xinyue Xiong, Alessandro Vespignani, Marc Lipsitch, Mauricio Santillana |
PLoS Comput. Biol. | 6 |
| 2010 | Little Italy: An Agent-Based Approach to the Estimation of Contact Patterns- Fitting Predicted Matrices to Serological DataabstractKnowledge of social contact patterns still represents the most critical step for understanding the spread of directly transmitted infections. Data on social contact patterns are, however, expensive to obtain. A major issue is then whether the simulation of synthetic societies might be helpful to reliably reconstruct such data. In this paper, we compute a variety of synthetic age-specific contact matrices through simulation of a simple individual-based model (IBM). The model is informed by Italian Time Use data and routine socio-demographic data (e.g., school and workplace attendance, household structure, etc.). The model is named "Little Italy" because each artificial agent is a clone of a real person. In other words, each agent's daily diary is the one observed in a corresponding real individual sampled in the Italian Time Use Survey. We also generated contact matrices from the socio-demographic model underlying the Italian IBM for pandemic prediction. These synthetic matrices are then validated against recently collected Italian serological data for Varicella (VZV) and ParvoVirus (B19). Their performance in fitting sero-profiles are compared with other matrices available for Italy, such as the Polymod matrix. Synthetic matrices show the same qualitative features of the ones estimated from sample surveys: for example, strong assortativeness and the presence of super- and sub-diagonal stripes related to contacts between parents and children. Once validated against serological data, Little Italy matrices fit worse than the Polymod one for VZV, but better than concurrent matrices for B19. This is the first occasion where synthetic contact matrices are systematically compared with real ones, and validated against epidemiological data. The results suggest that simple, carefully designed, synthetic matrices can provide a fruitful complementary approach to questionnaire-based matrices. The paper also supports the idea that, depending on the transmissibility level of the infection, either the number of different contacts, or repeated exposure, may be the key factor for transmission. Fabrizio Iozzi, Francesco Trusiano, Matteo Chinazzi, Francesco C. Billari, Emilio Zagheni, Stefano Merler, Marco Ajelli, Emanuele Del Fava, Piero Manfredi |
PLoS Comput. Biol. | 3 |