Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Keivan Shariatmadar
dblp:117/6946
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
1as first author
6since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0002-7364-5382ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 9 · 1 first-author · 6 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1
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 |
Trustworthy machine learning · 64% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 19% Kernel, tree and ensemble methods · 11% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
3.5 | 4 | 2026 | A Review of Uncertainty Representation and Quantification in Neural Networks · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2026 Credal Wrapper of Model Averaging for Uncertainty Estimation in Classification · ICLR 2025 Random-Set Neural Networks · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › deep probabilistic models › bayesian deep learning
bayesian neural networks |
1.9 | 2 | 2026 | A Review of Uncertainty Representation and Quantification in Neural Networks · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2026 Credal Wrapper of Model Averaging for Uncertainty Estimation in Classification · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation › epistemic uncertainty
credal set |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Credal Wrapper of Model Averaging for Uncertainty Estimation in Classification · ICLR 2025 Credal Deep Ensembles for Uncertainty Quantification · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods › ensemble learning
deep ensembles |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Credal Wrapper of Model Averaging for Uncertainty Estimation in Classification · ICLR 2025 Credal Deep Ensembles for Uncertainty Quantification · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation
epistemic uncertainty |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Random-Set Neural Networks · ICLR 2025 Credal Deep Ensembles for Uncertainty Quantification · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty modeling |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | A Review of Uncertainty Representation and Quantification in Neural Networks · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2026 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › uncertainty reasoning
belief functions |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Random-Set Neural Networks · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
calibration |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Credal Wrapper of Model Averaging for Uncertainty Estimation in Classification · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › bayesian model selection
model averaging |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Credal Wrapper of Model Averaging for Uncertainty Estimation in Classification · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
out-of-distribution detection |
0.5 | 2 | 2025 | Random-Set Neural Networks · ICLR 2025 Credal Deep Ensembles for Uncertainty Quantification · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
credal sets · 1.9interval models · 1.0dirichlet distribution · 1.0deep ensembles · 1.0belief functions · 1.0bayesian neural network · 1.0random sets · 0.9intersection probability transformation · 0.9conformal prediction · 0.9credal-set neural network · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | A Review of Uncertainty Representation and Quantification in Neural NetworksabstractEffectively estimating the uncertainty attached to neural network predictions thus becomes essential to improve robustness, reliability, and trustworthiness. This paper provides an overview of various methodologies for representing, quantifying, and distinguishing two major types of uncertainties (namely, 'aleatoric' and 'epistemic' uncertainty) in neural networks. The review covers classical probabilistic techniques such as Bayesian neural networks and deep ensembles, methods from generalized probability that leverage uncertainty representations such as Dirichlet distributions, belief functions, random sets, probability intervals, and credal sets, among others. Additionally, interval-based approaches employing interval models are also examined. We discuss the strengths and limitations of various methodologies and identify promising research directions for potential future exploration. Fabio Cuzzolin, Keivan Shariatmadar, David Moens, Hans Hallez |
IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. | 3 |
| 2025 | Random-Set Neural NetworksabstractMachine learning is increasingly deployed in safety-critical domains where erroneous predictions may lead to potentially catastrophic consequences, highlighting the need for learning systems to be aware of how confident they are in their own predictions: in other words, 'to know when they do not know’. In this paper, we propose a novel Random-Set Neural Network (RS-NN) approach to classification which predicts *belief functions* (rather than classical probability vectors) over the class list using the mathematics of *random sets*, i.e., distributions over the collection of *sets* of classes. RS-NN encodes the 'epistemic' uncertainty induced by training sets that are insufficiently representative or limited in size via the size of the convex set of probability vectors associated with a predicted belief function. Our approach outperforms state-of-the-art Bayesian and Ensemble methods in terms of accuracy, uncertainty estimation and out-of-distribution (OoD) detection on multiple benchmarks (CIFAR-10 vs SVHN/Intel-Image, MNIST vs FMNIST/KMNIST, ImageNet vs ImageNet-O). RS-NN also scales up effectively to large-scale architectures (e.g. WideResNet-28-10, VGG16, Inception V3, EfficientNetB2 and ViT-Base-16),
exhibits remarkable robustness to adversarial attacks and can provide statistical guarantees in a conformal learning setting. Shireen Kudukkil Manchingal, Muhammad Mubashar, Keivan Shariatmadar, Fabio Cuzzolin |
ICLR | 4 |
| 2025 | Credal Wrapper of Model Averaging for Uncertainty Estimation in ClassificationabstractThis paper presents an innovative approach, called credal wrapper, to formulating a credal set representation of model averaging for Bayesian neural networks (BNNs) and deep ensembles (DEs), capable of improving uncertainty estimation in classification tasks. Given a finite collection of single predictive distributions derived from BNNs or DEs, the proposed credal wrapper approach extracts an upper and a lower probability bound per class, acknowledging the epistemic uncertainty due to the availability of a limited amount of distributions. Such probability intervals over classes can be mapped on a convex set of probabilities (a credal set) from which, in turn, a unique prediction can be obtained using a transformation called intersection probability transformation. In this article, we conduct extensive experiments on several out-of-distribution (OOD) detection benchmarks, encompassing various dataset pairs (CIFAR10/100 vs SVHN/Tiny-ImageNet, CIFAR10 vs CIFAR10-C, CIFAR100 vs CIFAR100-C and ImageNet vs ImageNet-O) and using different network architectures (such as VGG16, ResNet-18/50, EfficientNet B2, and ViT Base). Compared to the BNN and DE baselines, the proposed credal wrapper method exhibits superior performance in uncertainty estimation and achieves a lower expected calibration error on corrupted data. Fabio Cuzzolin, Keivan Shariatmadar, David Moens, Hans Hallez |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2025 | Most likely heteroscedastic Gaussian process via kernel smoothing
Ghifari Adam Faza, Nasrulloh R. B. S. Loka, Keivan Shariatmadar, Hans Hallez, David Moens |
Knowl. Based Syst. | 3 |
| 2025 | CreINNs: Credal-Set Interval Neural Networks for Uncertainty Estimation in Classification TasksabstractEffective uncertainty estimation is becoming increasingly attractive for enhancing the reliability of neural networks. This work presents a novel approach, termed Credal-Set Interval Neural Networks (CreINNs), for classification. CreINNs retain the fundamental structure of traditional Interval Neural Networks, capturing weight uncertainty through deterministic intervals. CreINNs are designed to predict an upper and a lower probability bound for each class, rather than a single probability value. The probability intervals can define a credal set, facilitating estimating different types of uncertainties associated with predictions. Experiments on standard multiclass and binary classification tasks demonstrate that the proposed CreINNs can achieve superior or comparable quality of uncertainty estimation compared to variational Bayesian Neural Networks (BNNs) and Deep Ensembles. Furthermore, CreINNs significantly reduce the computational complexity of variational BNNs during inference. Moreover, the effective uncertainty quantification of CreINNs is also verified when the input data are intervals. Keivan Shariatmadar, Shireen Kudukkil Manchingal, Fabio Cuzzolin, David Moens, Hans Hallez |
Neural Networks | 2 |
| 2024 | Credal Deep Ensembles for Uncertainty QuantificationabstractThis paper introduces an innovative approach to classification called Credal Deep Ensembles (CreDEs), namely, ensembles of novel Credal-Set Neural Networks (CreNets). CreNets are trained to predict a lower and an upper probability bound for each class, which, in turn, determine a convex set of probabilities (credal set) on the class set. The training employs a loss inspired by distributionally robust optimization which simulates the potential divergence of the test distribution from the training distribution, in such a way that the width of the predicted probability interval reflects the epistemic uncertainty about the future data distribution. Ensembles can be constructed by training multiple CreNets, each associated with a different random seed, and averaging the outputted intervals. Extensive experiments are conducted on various out-of-distributions (OOD) detection benchmarks (CIFAR10/100 vs SVHN/Tiny-ImageNet, CIFAR10 vs CIFAR10-C, ImageNet vs ImageNet-O) and using different network architectures (ResNet50, VGG16, and ViT Base). Compared to Deep Ensemble baselines, CreDEs demonstrate higher test accuracy, lower expected calibration error, and significantly improved epistemic uncertainty estimation. Fabio Cuzzolin, Shireen Kudukkil Manchingal, Keivan Shariatmadar, David Moens, Hans Hallez |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2020 | Numerical Linear Programming under Non-Probabilistic Uncertainty Models - Interval and Fuzzy SetsabstractThis paper considers a linear optimisation problem under uncertainty with at least one element modelled as a non-probabilistic uncertainty. The uncertainty is expressed in the coefficient matrices of constraints and/or coefficients of goal function. Previous work converts such problems to classical (linear) optimisation problems and eliminates uncertainty by converting the linear programming under uncertainty problem to a decision problem using imprecise probability and imprecise decision theory. Our aim here is to generalise this approach numerically and present three methods to calculate the solution. We investigate what numerical results can be obtained for interval and fuzzy types of uncertainty models and compare them to classical probabilistic cases — for two different optimality criteria: maximinity and maximality. We also provide an efficient method to calculate the maximal solutions in the fuzzy set model. A numerical example is considered for illustration of the results. Keivan Shariatmadar, Mark Versteyhe |
Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst. | 1 |
| 2012 | Maximin and Maximal Solutions for Linear Programming Problems with Possibilistic Uncertainty
Erik Quaeghebeur, Nathan Huntley, Keivan Shariatmadar, Gert de Cooman |
IPMU (3) | 3 |
| 2012 | Constrained optimization problems under uncertainty with coherent lower previsions
Erik Quaeghebeur, Keivan Shariatmadar, Gert de Cooman |
Fuzzy Sets Syst. | 2 |