BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Valentin Thomas

Valentin Thomas contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine LearningArtificial Intelligence

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

TabDPT: Scaling Tabular Foundation Models on Real Data

Tabular data is one of the most ubiquitous sources of information worldwide, spanning a wide variety of domains. This inherent heterogeneity has slowed the development of Tabular Foundation Models (TFMs) capable of fast generalization to unseen datasets. In-Context Learning (ICL) has recently emerged as a promising solution for TFMs, enabling dynamic adaptation to new tasks without additional tuning. While many studies have attempted to re-purpose large language models for tabular ICL, they have had limited success, so recent works have focused on developing tabular-specific foundation models. In this work, we propose an approach to combine ICL-based retrieval with self supervised learning to train tabular foundation models. We also investigate the utility of real vs. synthetic data for model pre-training, and show that real data can contain useful signal not easily captured in synthetic training. Specifically, we show that incorporating real data during the pre-training phase can lead to significantly faster training and better downstream generalization to unseen data. Our resulting model, TabDPT, achieves strong performance on both regression (CTR23) and classification (CC18) benchmarks. Importantly, we also demonstrate that with our pre-training procedure, scaling both model and data size leads to consistent performance improvements that follow power laws. This echoes scaling laws in LLMs and other foundation models, and suggests that large-scale TFMs can be achievable. We open-source our full pipeline: inference code including trained model weights can be found at github.com/layer6ai-labs/TabDPT-inference, and the training code to reproduce experiments can be found at github.com/layer6ai-labs/TabDPT-training.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2024arXiv

Bridging the Gap Between Target Networks and Functional Regularization

Bootstrapping is behind much of the successes of Deep Reinforcement Learning. However, learning the value function via bootstrapping often leads to unstable training due to fast-changing target values. Target Networks are employed to stabilize training by using an additional set of lagging parameters to estimate the target values. Despite the popularity of Target Networks, their effect on the optimization is still misunderstood. In this work, we show that they act as an implicit regularizer. This regularizer has disadvantages such as being inflexible and non convex. To overcome these issues, we propose an explicit Functional Regularization that is a convex regularizer in function space and can easily be tuned. We analyze the convergence of our method theoretically and empirically demonstrate that replacing Target Networks with the more theoretically grounded Functional Regularization approach leads to better sample efficiency and performance improvements.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2023arXiv

The Role of Baselines in Policy Gradient Optimization

We study the effect of baselines in on-policy stochastic policy gradient optimization, and close the gap between the theory and practice of policy optimization methods. Our first contribution is to show that the \emph{state value} baseline allows on-policy stochastic \emph{natural} policy gradient (NPG) to converge to a globally optimal policy at an $O(1/t)$ rate, which was not previously known. The analysis relies on two novel findings: the expected progress of the NPG update satisfies a stochastic version of the non-uniform Łojasiewicz (NŁ) inequality, and with probability 1 the state value baseline prevents the optimal action's probability from vanishing, thus ensuring sufficient exploration. Importantly, these results provide a new understanding of the role of baselines in stochastic policy gradient: by showing that the variance of natural policy gradient estimates remains unbounded with or without a baseline, we find that variance reduction \emph{cannot} explain their utility in this setting. Instead, the analysis reveals that the primary effect of the value baseline is to \textbf{reduce the aggressiveness of the updates} rather than their variance. That is, we demonstrate that a finite variance is \emph{not necessary} for almost sure convergence of stochastic NPG, while controlling update aggressiveness is both necessary and sufficient. Additional experimental results verify these theoretical findings.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Beyond variance reduction: Understanding the true impact of baselines on policy optimization

Bandit and reinforcement learning (RL) problems can often be framed as optimization problems where the goal is to maximize average performance while having access only to stochastic estimates of the true gradient. Traditionally, stochastic optimization theory predicts that learning dynamics are governed by the curvature of the loss function and the noise of the gradient estimates. In this paper we demonstrate that this is not the case for bandit and RL problems. To allow our analysis to be interpreted in light of multi-step MDPs, we focus on techniques derived from stochastic optimization principles (e.g., natural policy gradient and EXP3) and we show that some standard assumptions from optimization theory are violated in these problems. We present theoretical results showing that, at least for bandit problems, curvature and noise are not sufficient to explain the learning dynamics and that seemingly innocuous choices like the baseline can determine whether an algorithm converges. These theoretical findings match our empirical evaluation, which we extend to multi-state MDPs.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

On the interplay between noise and curvature and its effect on optimization and generalization

The speed at which one can minimize an expected loss using stochastic methods depends on two properties: the curvature of the loss and the variance of the gradients. While most previous works focus on one or the other of these properties, we explore how their interaction affects optimization speed. Further, as the ultimate goal is good generalization performance, we clarify how both curvature and noise are relevant to properly estimate the generalization gap. Realizing that the limitations of some existing works stems from a confusion between these matrices, we also clarify the distinction between the Fisher matrix, the Hessian, and the covariance matrix of the gradients.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access