Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Philip Becker-Ehmck
dblp:241/9813
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 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
3 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 78% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 17% Motion planning and robot control · 6% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
model-based reinforcement learning |
1.0 | 2 | 2023 | Action Inference by Maximising Evidence: Zero-Shot Imitation from Observation with World Models · NeurIPS 2023 Switching Linear Dynamics for Variational Bayes Filtering · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › safe reinforcement learning
constrained policy optimization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Constrained Latent Action Policies for Model-Based Offline Reinforcement Learning · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured models › latent variable model › sequential latent variable model
latent action models |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Constrained Latent Action Policies for Model-Based Offline Reinforcement Learning · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
offline reinforcement learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Constrained Latent Action Policies for Model-Based Offline Reinforcement Learning · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Constrained Latent Action Policies for Model-Based Offline Reinforcement Learning · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
imitation learning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Action Inference by Maximising Evidence: Zero-Shot Imitation from Observation with World Models · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › imitation learning
learning from observation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Action Inference by Maximising Evidence: Zero-Shot Imitation from Observation with World Models · NeurIPS 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › model-based reinforcement learning
world model |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Action Inference by Maximising Evidence: Zero-Shot Imitation from Observation with World Models · NeurIPS 2023 |
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control
system identification |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Switching Linear Dynamics for Variational Bayes Filtering · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference › approximate inference › variational inference › sequential variational inference
variational filtering |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Switching Linear Dynamics for Variational Bayes Filtering · ICML 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
uncertainty estimation · 0.8generative model · 0.8bellman update · 0.8variational inference · 0.7evidence maximization · 0.7variational autoencoder · 0.4switching linear dynamics · 0.4concrete relaxation · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Constrained Latent Action Policies for Model-Based Offline Reinforcement LearningabstractIn offline reinforcement learning, a policy is learned using a static dataset in the absence of costly feedback from the environment. In contrast to the online setting, only using static datasets poses additional challenges, such as policies generating out-of-distribution samples. Model-based offline reinforcement learning methods try to overcome these by learning a model of the underlying dynamics of the environment and using it to guide policy search. It is beneficial but, with limited datasets, errors in the model and the issue of value overestimation among out-of-distribution states can worsen performance. Current model-based methods apply some notion of conservatism to the Bellman update, often implemented using uncertainty estimation derived from model ensembles. In this paper, we propose Constrained Latent Action Policies (C-LAP) which learns a generative model of the joint distribution of observations and actions. We cast policy learning as a constrained objective to always stay within the support of the latent action distribution, and use the generative capabilities of the model to impose an implicit constraint on the generated actions. Thereby eliminating the need to use additional uncertainty penalties on the Bellman update and significantly decreasing the number of gradient steps required to learn a policy. We empirically evaluate C-LAP on the D4RL and V-D4RL benchmark, and show that C-LAP is competitive to state-of-the-art methods, especially outperforming on datasets with visual observations. Marvin Alles, Philip Becker-Ehmck, Patrick van der Smagt, Maximilian Karl |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2023 | Action Inference by Maximising Evidence: Zero-Shot Imitation from Observation with World ModelsabstractUnlike most reinforcement learning agents which require an unrealistic amount of environment interactions to learn a new behaviour, humans excel at learning quickly by merely observing and imitating others. This ability highly depends on the fact that humans have a model of their own embodiment that allows them to infer the most likely actions that led to the observed behaviour. In this paper, we propose Action Inference by Maximising Evidence (AIME) to replicate this behaviour using world models. AIME consists of two distinct phases. In the first phase, the agent learns a world model from its past experience to understand its own body by maximising the ELBO. While in the second phase, the agent is given some observation-only demonstrations of an expert performing a novel task and tries to imitate the expert's behaviour. AIME achieves this by defining a policy as an inference model and maximising the evidence of the demonstration under the policy and world model. Our method is "zero-shot" in the sense that it does not require further training for the world model or online interactions with the environment after given the demonstration. We empirically validate the zero-shot imitation performance of our method on the Walker and Cheetah embodiment of the DeepMind Control Suite and find it outperforms the state-of-the-art baselines. Code is available at: https://github.com/argmax-ai/aime. Xingyuan Zhang, Philip Becker-Ehmck, Patrick van der Smagt, Maximilian Karl |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2019 | Switching Linear Dynamics for Variational Bayes FilteringabstractSystem identification of complex and nonlinear systems is a central problem for model predictive control and model-based reinforcement learning. Despite their complexity, such systems can often be approximated well by a set of linear dynamical systems if broken into appropriate subsequences. This mechanism not only helps us find good approximations of dynamics, but also gives us deeper insight into the underlying system. Leveraging Bayesian inference, Variational Autoencoders and Concrete relaxations, we show how to learn a richer and more meaningful state space, e.g. encoding joint constraints and collisions with walls in a maze, from partial and high-dimensional observations. This representation translates into a gain of accuracy of learned dynamics showcased on various simulated tasks. Philip Becker-Ehmck, Jan Peters 0001, Patrick van der Smagt |
ICML | 1 |
| 2019 | Unsupervised Real-Time Control Through Variational Empowerment
Maximilian Karl, Philip Becker-Ehmck, Maximilian Soelch 0001, Djalel Benbouzid, Patrick van der Smagt, Justin Bayer |
ISRR | 2 |