David Duvenaud's guest appearances

David Duvenaud

The TWIML AI Podcast (formerly This Week in Machine Learning & Artificial Intelligence)

In Context

Towards Data Science

Jeremy Howard

Tim Rocktäschel

Ben Lorica

Melanie Mitchell

Emmanuel Ameisen

Roland Memisevic

Solmaz Shahalizadeh

Max Welling

Mike Tung

Ayanna Howard

Margaret Mitchell

Kate Darling

Jason Holmberg

Lotte Bransen

Christopher Berner

OwlTail

In the early 1900s, all of our predictions were the direct product of human brains. Scientists, analysts, climatologists, mathematicians, bankers, lawyers and politicians did their best to anticipate future events, and plan accordingly. Take physics, for example, where every task we think of as part of the learning process, from data collection to cleaning to feature selection to modeling, all had to happen inside a physicist’s head. When Einstein introduced gravitational fields, what he was really doing was proposing a new feature to be added to our model of the universe. And the gravitational field equations that he put forward at the same time were an update to that very model. Einstein didn’t come up with his new model (or “theory” as physicists call it) of gravity by running model.fit() in a jupyter notebook. In fact, he never outsourced any of the computations that were needed to develop it to machines. Today, that’s somewhat unusual, and most of the predictions that the world runs on are generated in part by computers. But only in part — until we have fully general artificial intelligence, machine learning will always be a mix of two things: first, the constraints that human developers impose on their models, and second, the calculations that go into optimizing those models, which we outsource to machines. The human touch is still a necessary and ubiquitous component of every machine learning pipeline, but it’s ultimately limiting: the more of the learning pipeline that can be outsourced to machines, the more we can take advantage of computers’ ability to learn faster and from far more data than human beings. But designing algorithms that are flexible enough to do that requires serious outside-of-the-box thinking — exactly the kind of thinking that University of Toronto professor and researcher David Duvenaud specializes in. I asked David to join me for the latest episode of the podcast to talk about his research on more flexible and robust machine learning strategies.

In the early 1900s, all of our predictions were the direct product of human brains. Scientists, analysts, climatologists, mathematicians, bankers, lawyers and politicians did their best to anticipate future events, and plan accordingly. Take physics, for example, where every task we think of as part of the learning process, from data collection to cleaning to feature selection to modeling, all had to happen inside a physicist’s head. When Einstein introduced gravitational fields, what he was really doing was proposing a new feature to be added to our model of the universe. And the gravitational field equations that he put forward at the same time were an update to that very model. Einstein didn’t come up with his new model (or “theory” as physicists call it) of gravity by running <code>model.fit()</code> in a jupyter notebook. In fact, he never outsourced any of the computations that were needed to develop it to machines. Today, that’s somewhat unusual, and most of the predictions that the world runs on are generated in part by computers. But only in part — until we have fully general artificial intelligence, machine learning will always be a mix of two things: first, the constraints that human developers impose on their models, and second, the calculations that go into optimizing those models, which we outsource to machines. The human touch is still a necessary and ubiquitous component of every machine learning pipeline, but it’s ultimately limiting: the more of the learning pipeline that can be outsourced to machines, the more we can take advantage of computers’ ability to learn faster and from far more data than human beings. But designing algorithms that are flexible enough to do that requires serious outside-of-the-box thinking — exactly the kind of thinking that University of Toronto professor and researcher David Duvenaud specializes in. I asked David to join me for the latest episode of the podcast to talk about his research on more flexible and robust machine learning strategies.

58. David Duvenaud - Using generative models for explainable AI 

Today we’re joined by David Duvenaud, Assistant Professor at the University of Toronto, to discuss his research on Neural Ordinary Differential Equations, a type of continuous-depth neural network. In our conversation, we talk through a few of David’s papers on the subject. We discuss the problem that David is trying to solve with this research, the potential that ODEs have to replace “the backbone” of the neural networks that are used to train today, and David’s approach to engineering.

Today we’re joined by David Duvenaud, Assistant Professor at the University of Toronto, to discuss his research on Neural Ordinary Differential Equations, a type of continuous-depth neural network. In our conversation, we talk through a few of David’s papers on the subject. We discuss the problem that David is trying to solve with this research, the potential that ODEs have to replace “the backbone” of the neural networks that are used to train today, and David’s approach to engineering.

Neural Ordinary Differential Equations with David Duvenaud - #364

In this episode, we hear from David Duvenaud, assistant professor in the Computer Science and Statistics departments at the University of Toronto. David joined me after his talk at the Deep Learning Summit on “Composing Graphical Models With Neural Networks for Structured Representations and Fast Inference.” In our conversation, we discuss the generalized modeling and inference framework that David and his team have created, which combines the strengths of both probabilistic graphical models and deep learning methods. He gives us a walkthrough of his use case which is to automatically segment and categorize mouse behavior from raw video, and we discuss how the framework is applied here and for other use cases. We also discuss some of the differences between the frequentist and bayesian statistical approaches. The notes for this show can be found at twimlai.com/talk/96

In this episode, we hear from David Duvenaud, assistant professor in the Computer Science and Statistics departments at the University of Toronto. David joined me after his talk at the Deep Learning Summit on “Composing Graphical Models With Neural Networks for Structured Representations and Fast Inference.” In our conversation, we discuss the generalized modeling and inference framework that David and his team have created, which combines the strengths of both probabilistic graphical models and deep learning methods. He gives us a walkthrough of his use case which is to automatically segment and categorize mouse behavior from raw video, and we discuss how the framework is applied here and for other use cases. We also discuss some of the differences between the frequentist and bayesian statistical approaches. The notes for this show can be found at <a href="http://twimlai.com/talk/96" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">twimlai.com/talk/96</a>

Composing Graphical Models With Neural Networks with David Duvenaud - TWiML Talk #96