Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Matthias Bauer 0001
dblp:90/3588-1
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
2as first author
4since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0001-7040-2054ORCID · conflict
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 7 · 1 first-author · 4 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 1 first-author · 1 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 |
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 76% Efficient and distributed learning · 11% Trustworthy machine learning · 7% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Image and video coding · 100% |
Topics — the 19 heaviest of 19, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Image and video coding › neural compression
neural image and video compression |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | C3: High-Performance and Low-Complexity Neural Compression from a Single Image or Video · CVPR 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes
gaussian process |
0.6 | 2 | 2018 | Learning Invariances using the Marginal Likelihood · NeurIPS 2018 Understanding Probabilistic Sparse Gaussian Process Approximations · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › deep probabilistic models
bayesian deep learning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Laplace Redux - Effortless Bayesian Deep Learning · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference
bayesian model selection |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Scalable Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Model Selection in Deep Learning · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › automated machine learning › neural architecture search
hyperparameter and architecture selection |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Scalable Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Model Selection in Deep Learning · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › approximate bayesian inference
laplace approximation |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Laplace Redux - Effortless Bayesian Deep Learning · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › bayesian model selection
marginal likelihood estimation |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Scalable Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Model Selection in Deep Learning · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
bayesian inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Meta-Learning Probabilistic Inference for Prediction · ICLR (Poster) 2019 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
meta-learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Meta-Learning Probabilistic Inference for Prediction · ICLR (Poster) 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
predictive inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Meta-Learning Probabilistic Inference for Prediction · ICLR (Poster) 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
probabilistic inference |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Meta-Learning Probabilistic Inference for Prediction · ICLR (Poster) 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
marginal likelihood |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Learning Invariances using the Marginal Likelihood · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Learning Invariances using the Marginal Likelihood · NeurIPS 2018 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › stochastic processes › gaussian process
sparse approximation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Understanding Probabilistic Sparse Gaussian Process Approximations · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference › variational objective
variational free energy |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Understanding Probabilistic Sparse Gaussian Process Approximations · NIPS 2016 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | C3: High-Performance and Low-Complexity Neural Compression from a Single Image or Video · CVPR 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
calibration |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Scalable Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Model Selection in Deep Learning · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
out-of-distribution detection |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Scalable Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Model Selection in Deep Learning · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Laplace Redux - Effortless Bayesian Deep Learning · NeurIPS 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
rate-distortion optimization · 1.5overfitting · 1.5laplace approximation · 1.0hessian computation · 0.5hessian approximation · 0.5gauss-newton approximation · 0.5meta-learning · 0.4amortized inference · 0.4variational inference · 0.3data augmentation · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | C3: High-Performance and Low-Complexity Neural Compression from a Single Image or VideoabstractMost neural compression models are trained on large datasets of images or videos in order to generalize to unseen data. Such generalization typically requires large and expressive architectures with a high decoding complexity. Here we introduce C3, a neural compression method with strong rate-distortion (RD) performance that instead overfits a small model to each image or video separately. The resulting decoding complexity of C3 can be an order of magnitude lower than neural baselines with similar RD performance. C3 builds on Cool-chic [43] and makes several simple and effective improvements for images. We further develop new methodology to apply C3 to videos. On the CLIC2020 image benchmark, we match the RD performance of VTM, the reference implementation of the H.266 codec, with less than 3k MACs/pixel for decoding. On the UVG video benchmark, we match the RD performance of the Video Compression Transformer [60], a well-established neural video codec, with less than 5k MACs/pixel for decoding. Hyunjik Kim, Matthias Bauer 0001, Lucas Theis, Jonathan Schwarz, Emilien Dupont |
CVPR | 2 |
| 2021 | Improving predictions of Bayesian neural nets via local linearizationabstractThe generalized Gauss-Newton (GGN) approximation is often used to make practical Bayesian deep learning approaches scalable by replacing a second order derivative with a product of first order derivatives. In this paper we argue that the GGN approximation should be understood as a local linearization of the underlying Bayesian neural network (BNN), which turns the BNN into a generalized linear model (GLM). Because we use this linearized model for posterior inference, we should also predict using this modified model instead of the original one. We refer to this modified predictive as "GLM predictive" and show that it effectively resolves common underfitting problems of the Laplace approximation. It extends previous results in this vein to general likelihoods and has an equivalent Gaussian process formulation, which enables alternative inference schemes for BNNs in function space. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach on several standard classification datasets as well as on out-of-distribution detection. We provide an implementation at https://github.com/AlexImmer/BNN-predictions. Alexander Immer, Maciej Jan Korzepa, Matthias Bauer 0001 |
AISTATS | 3 |
| 2021 | Scalable Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Model Selection in Deep LearningabstractMarginal-likelihood based model-selection, even though promising, is rarely used in deep learning due to estimation difficulties. Instead, most approaches rely on validation data, which may not be readily available. In this work, we present a scalable marginal-likelihood estimation method to select both hyperparameters and network architectures, based on the training data alone. Some hyperparameters can be estimated online during training, simplifying the procedure. Our marginal-likelihood estimate is based on Laplace’s method and Gauss-Newton approximations to the Hessian, and it outperforms cross-validation and manual tuning on standard regression and image classification datasets, especially in terms of calibration and out-of-distribution detection. Our work shows that marginal likelihoods can improve generalization and be useful when validation data is unavailable (e.g., in nonstationary settings). Alexander Immer, Matthias Bauer 0001, Vincent Fortuin, Gunnar Rätsch, Mohammad Emtiyaz Khan |
ICML | 2 |
| 2021 | Laplace Redux - Effortless Bayesian Deep LearningabstractBayesian formulations of deep learning have been shown to have compelling theoretical properties and offer practical functional benefits, such as improved predictive uncertainty quantification and model selection. The Laplace approximation (LA) is a classic, and arguably the simplest family of approximations for the intractable posteriors of deep neural networks. Yet, despite its simplicity, the LA is not as popular as alternatives like variational Bayes or deep ensembles. This may be due to assumptions that the LA is expensive due to the involved Hessian computation, that it is difficult to implement, or that it yields inferior results. In this work we show that these are misconceptions: we (i) review the range of variants of the LA including versions with minimal cost overhead; (ii) introduce "laplace", an easy-to-use software library for PyTorch offering user-friendly access to all major flavors of the LA; and (iii) demonstrate through extensive experiments that the LA is competitive with more popular alternatives in terms of performance, while excelling in terms of computational cost. We hope that this work will serve as a catalyst to a wider adoption of the LA in practical deep learning, including in domains where Bayesian approaches are not typically considered at the moment. Erik A. Daxberger, Agustinus Kristiadi, Alexander Immer, Runa Eschenhagen, Matthias Bauer 0001, Philipp Hennig |
NeurIPS | 5 |
| 2019 | Meta-Learning Probabilistic Inference for Prediction
Jonathan Gordon 0003, John Bronskill, Matthias Bauer 0001, Sebastian Nowozin, Richard E. Turner |
ICLR (Poster) | 3 |
| 2018 | Automatic estimation of modulation transfer functionsabstractThe modulation transfer function (MTF) is widely used to characterise the performance of optical systems. Measuring it is costly and it is thus rarely available for a given lens specimen. Instead, MTFs based on simulations or, at best, MTFs measured on other specimens of the same lens are used. Fortunately, images recorded through an optical system contain ample information about its MTF, only that it is confounded with the statistics of the images. This work presents a method to estimate the MTF of camera lens systems directly from photographs, without the need for expensive equipment. We use a custom grid display to accurately measure the point response of lenses to acquire ground truth training data. We then use the same lenses to record natural images and employ a data-driven supervised learning approach using a convolutional neural network to estimate the MTF on small image patches, aggregating the information into MTF charts over the entire field of view. It generalises to unseen lenses and can be applied for single photographs, with the performance improving if multiple photographs are available. Matthias Bauer 0001, Valentin Volchkov, Michael Hirsch 0001, Bernhard Schölkopf |
ICCP | 1 |
| 2018 | Learning Invariances using the Marginal LikelihoodabstractIn many supervised learning tasks, learning what changes do not affect the predic-tion target is as crucial to generalisation as learning what does. Data augmentationis a common way to enforce a model to exhibit an invariance: training data is modi-fied according to an invariance designed by a human and added to the training data.We argue that invariances should be incorporated the model structure, and learnedusing themarginal likelihood, which can correctly reward the reduced complexityof invariant models. We incorporate invariances in a Gaussian process, due to goodmarginal likelihood approximations being available for these models. Our maincontribution is a derivation for a variational inference scheme for invariant Gaussianprocesses where the invariance is described by a probability distribution that canbe sampled from, much like how data augmentation is implemented in practice Mark van der Wilk, Matthias Bauer 0001, S. T. John, James Hensman |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2016 | Understanding Probabilistic Sparse Gaussian Process ApproximationsabstractGood sparse approximations are essential for practical inference in Gaussian Processes as the computational cost of exact methods is prohibitive for large datasets. The Fully Independent Training Conditional (FITC) and the Variational Free Energy (VFE) approximations are two recent popular methods. Despite superficial similarities, these approximations have surprisingly different theoretical properties and behave differently in practice. We thoroughly investigate the two methods for regression both analytically and through illustrative examples, and draw conclusions to guide practical application. Matthias Bauer 0001, Mark van der Wilk, Carl E. Rasmussen |
NIPS | 1 |