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

Jonathan Deaton

dblp:276/1165 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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
2 papers
Trustworthy machine learning · 54% Representation and self-supervised learning · 31% Image recognition and object detection · 16%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.612022
Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learning · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
underspecification
0.612022
Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learning · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
contrastive learning
0.512021
Big Self-Supervised Models Advance Medical Image Classification · ICCV 2021
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection › medical image analysis
medical image classification
0.512021
Big Self-Supervised Models Advance Medical Image Classification · ICCV 2021
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › unsupervised representation learning
self-supervised representation learning
0.512021
Big Self-Supervised Models Advance Medical Image Classification · ICCV 2021

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

transfer learning · 0.5self-supervised learning · 0.5contrastive learning · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learning
abstract
Machine learning (ML) systems often exhibit unexpectedly poor behavior when they are deployed in real-world domains. We identify underspecification in ML pipelines as a key reason for these failures. An ML pipeline is the full procedure followed to train and validate a predictor. Such a pipeline is underspecified when it can return many distinct predictors with equivalently strong test performance. Underspecification is common in modern ML pipelines that primarily validate predictors on held-out data that follow the same distribution as the training data. Predictors returned by underspecified pipelines are often treated as equivalent based on their training domain performance, but we show here that such predictors can behave very differently in deployment domains. This ambiguity can lead to instability and poor model behavior in practice, and is a distinct failure mode from previously identified issues arising from structural mismatch between training and deployment domains. We provide evidence that underspecfication has substantive implications for practical ML pipelines, using examples from computer vision, medical imaging, natural language processing, clinical risk prediction based on electronic health records, and medical genomics. Our results show the need to explicitly account for underspecification in modeling pipelines that are intended for real-world deployment in any domain.
Alexander D'Amour, Katherine A. Heller, Dan Moldovan, Ben Adlam, Babak Alipanahi, Alex Beutel, Christina Chen, Jonathan Deaton, Jacob Eisenstein, Matthew Hoffman 0001, Farhad Hormozdiari, Neil Houlsby, Shaobo Hou, Ghassen Jerfel, Alan Karthikesalingam, Mario Lucic, Yi-An Ma, Cory Y. McLean, Diana Mincu, Akinori Mitani, Andrea Montanari, Zachary Nado, Vivek Natarajan, Christopher Nielson, Thomas F. Osborne, Rajiv Raman 0003, Kim Ramasamy, Rory Sayres, Jessica Schrouff, Martin G. Seneviratne, Shannon Sequeira, Harini Suresh, Victor Veitch, Max Vladymyrov, Xuezhi Wang 0002, Kellie Webster, Steve Yadlowsky, Taedong Yun, Xiaohua Zhai, D. Sculley
J. Mach. Learn. Res.8
2021 Big Self-Supervised Models Advance Medical Image Classification
abstract
Self-supervised pretraining followed by supervised fine-tuning has seen success in image recognition, especially when labeled examples are scarce, but has received limited attention in medical image analysis. This paper studies the effectiveness of self-supervised learning as a pre-training strategy for medical image classification. We conduct experiments on two distinct tasks: dermatology condition classification from digital camera images and multi-label chest X-ray classification, and demonstrate that self-supervised learning on ImageNet, followed by additional self-supervised learning on unlabeled domain-specific medical images significantly improves the accuracy of medical image classifiers. We introduce a novel Multi-Instance Contrastive Learning (MICLe) method that uses multiple images of the underlying pathology per patient case, when available, to construct more informative positive pairs for self-supervised learning. Combining our contributions, we achieve an improvement of 6.7% in top-1 accuracy and an improvement of 1.1% in mean AUC on dermatology and chest X-ray classification respectively, outperforming strong supervised baselines pretrained on ImageNet. In addition, we show that big self-supervised models are robust to distribution shift and can learn efficiently with a small number of labeled medical images.
Shekoofeh Azizi, Basil Mustafa, Fiona Ryan, Zachary Beaver, Jan Freyberg, Jonathan Deaton, Aaron Loh, Alan Karthikesalingam, Simon Kornblith, Ting Chen 0007, Vivek Natarajan, Mohammad Norouzi 0002
ICCV6