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

Sebastian Farquhar

dblp:215/5432 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
15ranked-venue papers
5as first author
13since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-9185-6415ORCID · corroborated

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 15 · 5 first-author · 13 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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
12 papers
Efficient and distributed learning · 31% Trustworthy machine learning · 24% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 11%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-AI interaction · 100%

Topics — the 27 heaviest of 32, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
causal reasoning
1.422024
Discovering Agents (Abstract Reprint) · AAAI 2024
Discovering agents · Artif. Intell. 2023
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
active learning
1.122022
Active Surrogate Estimators: An Active Learning Approach to Label-Efficient Model Evaluation · NeurIPS 2022
On Statistical Bias In Active Learning: How and When to Fix It · ICLR 2021
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reward design
0.912025
MONA: Myopic Optimization with Non-myopic Approval Can Mitigate Multi-step Reward Hacking · ICML 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › alignment
reward hacking
0.912025
MONA: Myopic Optimization with Non-myopic Approval Can Mitigate Multi-step Reward Hacking · ICML 2025
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems
agent modeling
0.812024
Discovering Agents (Abstract Reprint) · AAAI 2024
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › causal inference
causal discovery
0.712023
Discovering agents · Artif. Intell. 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.712023
Tracr: Compiled Transformers as a Laboratory for Interpretability · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
mechanistic interpretability
0.712023
Tracr: Compiled Transformers as a Laboratory for Interpretability · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation › predictive uncertainty
semantic uncertainty
0.712023
Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation · ICLR 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation
0.712023
Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation · ICLR 2023
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
data-efficient learning
0.612022
Prioritized Training on Points that are Learnable, Worth Learning, and not yet Learnt · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
data selection
0.612022
Prioritized Training on Points that are Learnable, Worth Learning, and not yet Learnt · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › federated learning
incentive mechanism
0.612022
Path-Specific Objectives for Safer Agent Incentives · AAAI 2022
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
label-efficient evaluation
0.612022
Active Surrogate Estimators: An Active Learning Approach to Label-Efficient Model Evaluation · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression
0.612022
Prospect Pruning: Finding Trainable Weights at Initialization using Meta-Gradients · ICLR 2022
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression
pruning
0.612022
Prospect Pruning: Finding Trainable Weights at Initialization using Meta-Gradients · ICLR 2022
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression › pruning › DNN pruning
pruning at initialization
0.612022
Prospect Pruning: Finding Trainable Weights at Initialization using Meta-Gradients · ICLR 2022
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
safe reinforcement learning
0.612022
Path-Specific Objectives for Safer Agent Incentives · AAAI 2022
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › efficient training
training acceleration
0.612022
Prioritized Training on Points that are Learnable, Worth Learning, and not yet Learnt · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › model validation
active testing
0.512021
Active Testing: Sample-Efficient Model Evaluation · ICML 2021
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
debiasing
0.512021
On Statistical Bias In Active Learning: How and When to Fix It · ICLR 2021
Machine learning › Learning theory
statistical learning theory
0.512021
On Statistical Bias In Active Learning: How and When to Fix It · ICLR 2021
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › deep probabilistic models › bayesian deep learning
bayesian neural networks
0.412020
Liberty or Depth: Deep Bayesian Neural Nets Do Not Need Complex Weight Posterior Approximations · NeurIPS 2020
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference
mean-field approximation
0.412020
Liberty or Depth: Deep Bayesian Neural Nets Do Not Need Complex Weight Posterior Approximations · NeurIPS 2020
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference
variational inference
0.412020
Liberty or Depth: Deep Bayesian Neural Nets Do Not Need Complex Weight Posterior Approximations · NeurIPS 2020
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
text generation
0.212023
Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation · ICLR 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › neural network interpretation
transformer interpretability
0.212023
Tracr: Compiled Transformers as a Laboratory for Interpretability · NeurIPS 2023

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

causal discovery · 2.2myopic optimization with non-myopic approval · 1.7game theory · 1.5acquisition strategy · 1.1superposition analysis · 0.7program compilation · 0.7linguistic invariance · 0.7influence diagrams · 0.7causal influence diagrams · 0.6causal effect estimation · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 MONA: Myopic Optimization with Non-myopic Approval Can Mitigate Multi-step Reward Hacking
abstract
Future advanced AI systems may learn sophisticated strategies through reinforcement learning (RL) that humans cannot understand well enough to safely evaluate. We propose a training method which avoids agents learning undesired multi-step plans that receive high reward (multi-step "reward hacks") even if humans are not able to detect that the behavior is undesired. The method, Myopic Optimization with Non-myopic Approval (MONA), works by combining short-sighted optimization with far-sighted reward. We demonstrate that MONA can prevent multi-step reward hacking that ordinary RL causes, even without being able to detect the reward hacking and without any extra information that ordinary RL does not get access to. We study MONA empirically in three settings which model different misalignment failure modes including 2-step environments with LLMs representing delegated oversight and encoded reasoning and longer-horizon gridworld environments representing sensor tampering.
Sebastian Farquhar, Vikrant Varma, David Lindner, David Elson, Caleb Biddulph, Ian Goodfellow, Rohin Shah
ICML1
2024 Discovering Agents (Abstract Reprint)
abstract
Causal models of agents have been used to analyse the safety aspects of machine learning systems. But identifying agents is non-trivial – often the causal model is just assumed by the modeller without much justification – and modelling failures can lead to mistakes in the safety analysis. This paper proposes the first formal causal definition of agents – roughly that agents are systems that would adapt their policy if their actions influenced the world in a different way. From this we derive the first causal discovery algorithm for discovering the presence of agents from empirical data, given a set of variables and under certain assumptions. We also provide algorithms for translating between causal models and game-theoretic influence diagrams. We demonstrate our approach by resolving some previous confusions caused by incorrect causal modelling of agents.
Zachary Kenton, Ramana Kumar, Sebastian Farquhar, Jonathan Richens, Matt MacDermott, Tom Everitt
AAAI3
2023 Do Bayesian Neural Networks Need To Be Fully Stochastic?
abstract
We investigate the benefit of treating all the parameters in a Bayesian neural network stochastically and find compelling theoretical and empirical evidence that this standard construction may be unnecessary. To this end, we prove that expressive predictive distributions require only small amounts of stochasticity. In particular, partially stochastic networks with only n stochastic biases are universal probabilistic predictors for n-dimensional predictive problems. In empirical investigations, we find no systematic benefit of full stochasticity across four different inference modalities and eight datasets; partially stochastic networks can match and sometimes even outperform fully stochastic networks, despite their reduced memory costs.
Mrinank Sharma, Sebastian Farquhar, Eric T. Nalisnick, Tom Rainforth
AISTATS2
2023 Prediction-Oriented Bayesian Active Learning
Freddie Bickford Smith, Andreas Kirsch 0002, Sebastian Farquhar, Yarin Gal, Adam Foster 0001, Tom Rainforth
AISTATS3
2023 Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation
Lorenz Kuhn, Yarin Gal, Sebastian Farquhar
ICLR3
2023 Tracr: Compiled Transformers as a Laboratory for Interpretability
abstract
We show how to "compile" human-readable programs into standard decoder-only transformer models. Our compiler, Tracr, generates models with known structure. This structure can be used to design experiments. For example, we use it to study "superposition" in transformers that execute multi-step algorithms. Additionally, the known structure of Tracr-compiled models can serve as _ground-truth_ for evaluating interpretability methods. Commonly, because the "programs" learned by transformers are unknown it is unclear whether an interpretation succeeded. We demonstrate our approach by implementing and examining programs including computing token frequencies, sorting, and parenthesis checking. We provide an open-source implementation of Tracr at https://github.com/google-deepmind/tracr.
David Lindner, János Kramár, Sebastian Farquhar, Matthew Rahtz, Thomas McGrath 0001, Vladimir Mikulik
NeurIPS3
2023 Discovering agents
abstract
Causal models of agents have been used to analyse the safety aspects of machine learning systems. But identifying agents is non-trivial – often the causal model is just assumed by the modeller without much justification – and modelling failures can lead to mistakes in the safety analysis. This paper proposes the first formal causal definition of agents – roughly that agents are systems that would adapt their policy if their actions influenced the world in a different way. From this we derive the first causal discovery algorithm for discovering the presence of agents from empirical data, given a set of variables and under certain assumptions. We also provide algorithms for translating between causal models and game-theoretic influence diagrams. We demonstrate our approach by resolving some previous confusions caused by incorrect causal modelling of agents.
Zachary Kenton, Ramana Kumar, Sebastian Farquhar, Jonathan Richens, Matt MacDermott, Tom Everitt
Artif. Intell.3
2022 Path-Specific Objectives for Safer Agent Incentives
abstract
We present a general framework for training safe agents whose naive incentives are unsafe. As an example, manipulative or deceptive behaviour can improve rewards but should be avoided. Most approaches fail here: agents maximize expected return by any means necessary. We formally describe settings with `delicate' parts of the state which should not be used as a means to an end. We then train agents to maximize the causal effect of actions on the expected return which is not mediated by the delicate parts of state, using Causal Influence Diagram analysis. The resulting agents have no incentive to control the delicate state. We further show how our framework unifies and generalizes existing proposals.
Sebastian Farquhar, Ryan Carey, Tom Everitt
AAAI1
2022 Prospect Pruning: Finding Trainable Weights at Initialization using Meta-Gradients
Milad Alizadeh, Shyam A. Tailor, Luisa M. Zintgraf, Joost van Amersfoort, Sebastian Farquhar, Nicholas D. Lane, Yarin Gal
ICLR5
2022 Prioritized Training on Points that are Learnable, Worth Learning, and not yet Learnt
abstract
Training on web-scale data can take months. But much computation and time is wasted on redundant and noisy points that are already learnt or not learnable. To accelerate training, we introduce Reducible Holdout Loss Selection (RHO-LOSS), a simple but principled technique which selects approximately those points for training that most reduce the model’s generalization loss. As a result, RHO-LOSS mitigates the weaknesses of existing data selection methods: techniques from the optimization literature typically select "hard" (e.g. high loss) points, but such points are often noisy (not learnable) or less task-relevant. Conversely, curriculum learning prioritizes "easy" points, but such points need not be trained on once learned. In contrast, RHO-LOSS selects points that are learnable, worth learning, and not yet learnt. RHO-LOSS trains in far fewer steps than prior art, improves accuracy, and speeds up training on a wide range of datasets, hyperparameters, and architectures (MLPs, CNNs, and BERT). On the large web-scraped image dataset Clothing-1M, RHO-LOSS trains in 18x fewer steps and reaches 2% higher final accuracy than uniform data shuffling.
Sören Mindermann, Jan Markus Brauner, Muhammed Razzak, Mrinank Sharma, Andreas Kirsch 0002, Winnie Xu, Benedikt Höltgen, Aidan N. Gomez, Adrien Morisot, Sebastian Farquhar, Yarin Gal
ICML10
2022 Active Surrogate Estimators: An Active Learning Approach to Label-Efficient Model Evaluation
abstract
We propose Active Surrogate Estimators (ASEs), a new method for label-efficient model evaluation. Evaluating model performance is a challenging and important problem when labels are expensive. ASEs address this active testing problem using a surrogate-based estimation approach that interpolates the errors of points with unknown labels, rather than forming a Monte Carlo estimator. ASEs actively learn the underlying surrogate, and we propose a novel acquisition strategy, XWED, that tailors this learning to the final estimation task. We find that ASEs offer greater label-efficiency than the current state-of-the-art when applied to challenging model evaluation problems for deep neural networks.
Jannik Kossen, Sebastian Farquhar, Yarin Gal, Tom Rainforth
NeurIPS2
2021 On Statistical Bias In Active Learning: How and When to Fix It
Sebastian Farquhar, Yarin Gal, Tom Rainforth
ICLR1
2021 Active Testing: Sample-Efficient Model Evaluation
abstract
We introduce a new framework for sample-efficient model evaluation that we call active testing. While approaches like active learning reduce the number of labels needed for model training, existing literature largely ignores the cost of labeling test data, typically unrealistically assuming large test sets for model evaluation. This creates a disconnect to real applications, where test labels are important and just as expensive, e.g. for optimizing hyperparameters. Active testing addresses this by carefully selecting the test points to label, ensuring model evaluation is sample-efficient. To this end, we derive theoretically-grounded and intuitive acquisition strategies that are specifically tailored to the goals of active testing, noting these are distinct to those of active learning. As actively selecting labels introduces a bias; we further show how to remove this bias while reducing the variance of the estimator at the same time. Active testing is easy to implement and can be applied to any supervised machine learning method. We demonstrate its effectiveness on models including WideResNets and Gaussian processes on datasets including Fashion-MNIST and CIFAR-100.
Jannik Kossen, Sebastian Farquhar, Yarin Gal, Tom Rainforth
ICML2
2020 Radial Bayesian Neural Networks: Beyond Discrete Support In Large-Scale Bayesian Deep Learning
abstract
We propose Radial Bayesian Neural Networks (BNNs): a variational approximate posterior for BNNs which scales well to large models. Unlike scalable Bayesian deep learning methods like deep ensembles that have discrete support (assign exactly zero probability almost everywhere in weight-space) Radial BNNs maintain full support; letting them act as a prior for continual learning and avoiding the a priori implausibility of discrete support. Our method avoids a sampling problem in mean-field variational inference (MFVI) caused by the so-called ’soap-bubble’ pathology of multivariate Gaussians. We show that, unlike MFVI, Radial BNNs are robust to hyperparameters and can be efficiently applied to challenging real-world tasks without needing ad-hoc tweaks and intensive tuning: on a real-world medical imaging task Radial BNNs outperform MC dropout and deep ensembles.
Sebastian Farquhar, Michael A. Osborne, Yarin Gal
AISTATS1
2020 Liberty or Depth: Deep Bayesian Neural Nets Do Not Need Complex Weight Posterior Approximations
abstract
We challenge the longstanding assumption that the mean-field approximation for variational inference in Bayesian neural networks is severely restrictive, and show this is not the case in deep networks. We prove several results indicating that deep mean-field variational weight posteriors can induce similar distributions in function-space to those induced by shallower networks with complex weight posteriors. We validate our theoretical contributions empirically, both through examination of the weight posterior using Hamiltonian Monte Carlo in small models and by comparing diagonal- to structured-covariance in large settings. Since complex variational posteriors are often expensive and cumbersome to implement, our results suggest that using mean-field variational inference in a deeper model is both a practical and theoretically justified alternative to structured approximations.
Sebastian Farquhar, Lewis Smith, Yarin Gal
NeurIPS1