Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Marie-Karelle Riviere

dblp:176/9969 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 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
1 paper
Reinforcement learning · 100%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Medical and health informatics · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-armed bandit
0.512021
On Multi-Armed Bandit Designs for Dose-Finding Trials · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
thompson sampling
0.512021
On Multi-Armed Bandit Designs for Dose-Finding Trials · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021
Medical and health informatics › drug development › clinical trial
clinical trial design
0.112021
On Multi-Armed Bandit Designs for Dose-Finding Trials · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

thompson sampling · 1.0finite-time regret bounds · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 On Multi-Armed Bandit Designs for Dose-Finding Trials
abstract
We study the problem of finding the optimal dosage in early stage clinical trials through the multi-armed bandit lens. We advocate the use of the Thompson Sampling principle, a flexible algorithm that can accommodate different types of monotonicity assumptions on the toxicity and efficacy of the doses. For the simplest version of Thompson Sampling, based on a uniform prior distribution for each dose, we provide finite-time upper bounds on the number of sub-optimal dose selections, which is unprecedented for dose-finding algorithms. Through a large simulation study, we then show that variants of Thompson Sampling based on more sophisticated prior distributions outperform state-of-the-art dose identification algorithms in different types of dose-finding studies that occur in phase I or phase I/II trials.
Maryam Aziz, Emilie Kaufmann, Marie-Karelle Riviere
J. Mach. Learn. Res.3