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

Marco Baity-Jesi

dblp:52/11265 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-8723-906XORCID · verified

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 1 first-author · 3 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
Trustworthy machine learning · 32% Optimization for machine learning · 29% Deep learning architectures and training · 21%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Mathematical optimization · 100%

Topics — the 11 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness
1.422024
Initial Guessing Bias: How Untrained Networks Favor Some Classes · ICML 2024
A Theoretical Analysis of the Learning Dynamics under Class Imbalance · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › dataset bias
class bias
0.812024
Initial Guessing Bias: How Untrained Networks Favor Some Classes · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
weight initialization
0.812024
Initial Guessing Bias: How Untrained Networks Favor Some Classes · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Learning paradigms
class imbalance
0.712023
A Theoretical Analysis of the Learning Dynamics under Class Imbalance · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
convergence analysis
0.712023
A Theoretical Analysis of the Learning Dynamics under Class Imbalance · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › gradient-based optimization
gradient descent
0.712023
A Theoretical Analysis of the Learning Dynamics under Class Imbalance · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory
learning dynamics
0.712023
A Theoretical Analysis of the Learning Dynamics under Class Imbalance · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent
0.712023
A Theoretical Analysis of the Learning Dynamics under Class Imbalance · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › loss landscape
loss landscape geometry
0.312018
Comparing Dynamics: Deep Neural Networks versus Glassy Systems · ICML 2018
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training dynamics
0.312018
Comparing Dynamics: Deep Neural Networks versus Glassy Systems · ICML 2018
Mathematical optimization
nonconvex optimization
0.112018
Comparing Dynamics: Deep Neural Networks versus Glassy Systems · ICML 2018

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

statistical physics analysis · 0.8statistical physics · 0.7per-class gradient normalization · 0.7oversampling · 0.7mean-field theory · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Class Imbalance in Anomaly Detection: Learning from an Exactly Solvable Model
abstract
Class imbalance (CI) is a longstanding problem in machine learning, slowing down training and reducing performances. Although empirical remedies exist, it is often unclear which ones work best and when, due to the lack of an overarching theory. We address a common case of imbalance, that of anomaly (or outlier) detection. We provide a theoretical framework to analyze, interpret and address CI. It is based on an exact solution of the teacher-student perceptron model, through replica theory. Within this framework, one can distinguish several sources of CI: either intrinsic, train or test imbalance. Our analysis reveals that, depending on the specific problem setting, one source or another might dominate. We further find that the optimal train imbalance is generally different from 50%, with a non trivial dependence on the intrinsic imbalance, the abundance of data and on the noise in the learning. Moreover, there is a crossover between a small noise training regime where results are independent of the noise level to a high noise regime where performances quickly degrade with noise. Our results challenge some of the conventional wisdom on CI and pave the way for integrated approaches to the topic.
Francesco Saverio Pezzicoli, Valentina Ros, François P. Landes, Marco Baity-Jesi
AISTATS4
2024 Initial Guessing Bias: How Untrained Networks Favor Some Classes
abstract
Understanding and controlling biasing effects in neural networks is crucial for ensuring accurate and fair model performance. In the context of classification problems, we provide a theoretical analysis demonstrating that the structure of a deep neural network (DNN) can condition the model to assign all predictions to the same class, even before the beginning of training, and in the absence of explicit biases. We prove that, besides dataset properties, the presence of this phenomenon, which we call Initial Guessing Bias (IGB), is influenced by model choices including dataset preprocessing methods, and architectural decisions, such as activation functions, max-pooling layers, and network depth. Our analysis of IGB provides information for architecture selection and model initialization. We also highlight theoretical consequences, such as the breakdown of node-permutation symmetry, the violation of self-averaging and the non-trivial effects that depth has on the phenomenon.
Emanuele Francazi, Aurélien Lucchi, Marco Baity-Jesi
ICML3
2023 A Theoretical Analysis of the Learning Dynamics under Class Imbalance
abstract
Data imbalance is a common problem in machine learning that can have a critical effect on the performance of a model. Various solutions exist but their impact on the convergence of the learning dynamics is not understood. Here, we elucidate the significant negative impact of data imbalance on learning, showing that the learning curves for minority and majority classes follow sub-optimal trajectories when training with a gradient-based optimizer. This slowdown is related to the imbalance ratio and can be traced back to a competition between the optimization of different classes. Our main contribution is the analysis of the convergence of full-batch (GD) and stochastic gradient descent (SGD), and of variants that renormalize the contribution of each per-class gradient. We find that GD is not guaranteed to decrease the loss for each class but that this problem can be addressed by performing a per-class normalization of the gradient. With SGD, class imbalance has an additional effect on the direction of the gradients: the minority class suffers from a higher directional noise, which reduces the effectiveness of the per-class gradient normalization. Our findings not only allow us to understand the potential and limitations of strategies involving the per-class gradients, but also the reason for the effectiveness of previously used solutions for class imbalancesuch as oversampling.
Emanuele Francazi, Marco Baity-Jesi, Aurélien Lucchi
ICML2
2018 Comparing Dynamics: Deep Neural Networks versus Glassy Systems
abstract
We analyze numerically the training dynamics of deep neural networks (DNN) by using methods developed in statistical physics of glassy systems. The two main issues we address are the complexity of the loss-landscape and of the dynamics within it, and to what extent DNNs share similarities with glassy systems. Our findings, obtained for different architectures and data-sets, suggest that during the training process the dynamics slows down because of an increasingly large number of flat directions. At large times, when the loss is approaching zero, the system diffuses at the bottom of the landscape. Despite some similarities with the dynamics of mean-field glassy systems, in particular, the absence of barrier crossing, we find distinctive dynamical behaviors in the two cases, thus showing that the statistical properties of the corresponding loss and energy landscapes are different. In contrast, when the network is under-parametrized we observe a typical glassy behavior, thus suggesting the existence of different phases depending on whether the network is under-parametrized or over-parametrized.
Marco Baity-Jesi, Levent Sagun, Mario Geiger, Stefano Spigler, Gérard Ben Arous, Chiara Cammarota, Yann LeCun, Matthieu Wyart, Giulio Biroli
ICML1