Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
David Stap
dblp:264/9915
· DBLP profile ↗
7ranked-venue papers
3as first author
7since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0005-8683-8561ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 7 · 3 first-author · 7 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
5 papers |
Machine translation · 60% Language models and text generation · 23% Representation and self-supervised learning · 15% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Information retrieval · 100% |
Topics — the 11 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Machine translation
low-resource machine translation |
1.5 | 2 | 2025 | Can LLMs Really Learn to Translate a Low-Resource Language from One Grammar Book? · ICLR 2025 Multilingual k-Nearest-Neighbor Machine Translation · EMNLP 2023 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
in-context learning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Can LLMs Really Learn to Translate a Low-Resource Language from One Grammar Book? · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
text embedding |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | MMTEB: Massive Multilingual Text Embedding Benchmark · ICLR 2025 |
Information retrieval
cross-language information retrieval |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | MMTEB: Massive Multilingual Text Embedding Benchmark · ICLR 2025 |
Information retrieval
retrieval models |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | MMTEB: Massive Multilingual Text Embedding Benchmark · ICLR 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Machine translation
document-level machine translation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | The Fine-Tuning Paradox: Boosting Translation Quality Without Sacrificing LLM Abilities · ACL (1) 2024 |
Natural language and speech › Machine translation › neural machine translation
nearest neighbor machine translation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Multilingual k-Nearest-Neighbor Machine Translation · EMNLP 2023 |
Natural language and speech › Machine translation
neural machine translation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Multilingual k-Nearest-Neighbor Machine Translation · EMNLP 2023 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
instruction following |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Super-NaturalInstructions: Generalization via Declarative Instructions on 1600+ NLP Tasks · EMNLP 2022 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation analysis
embedding evaluation |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | MMTEB: Massive Multilingual Text Embedding Benchmark · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation › zero-shot learning
zero-shot task generalization |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Super-NaturalInstructions: Generalization via Declarative Instructions on 1600+ NLP Tasks · EMNLP 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
hard negative sampling · 1.7benchmark downsampling · 1.7fine-tuning · 1.6typological feature prompt · 0.9long-context prompting · 0.9few-shot learning · 0.8representation sharing · 0.7multilingual datastore · 0.7k-nearest neighbor retrieval · 0.7declarative instructions · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Analyzing and Improving Cross-lingual Knowledge Transfer for Machine Translation
David Stap |
EAMT (1) | 1 |
| 2025 | Can LLMs Really Learn to Translate a Low-Resource Language from One Grammar Book?abstractExtremely low-resource (XLR) languages lack substantial corpora for training NLP models, motivating the use of all available resources such as dictionaries and grammar books. Machine Translation from One Book (Tanzer et al., 2024) suggests that prompting long-context LLMs with one grammar book enables English–Kalamang translation, an XLR language unseen by LLMs—a noteworthy case of linguistics helping an NLP task. We investigate the source of this translation ability, finding almost all improvements stem from the book’s parallel examples rather than its grammatical explanations. We find similar results for Nepali and Guarani, seen low-resource languages, and we achieve performance comparable to an LLM with a grammar book by simply fine-tuning an encoder-decoder translation model. We then investigate where grammar books help by testing two linguistic tasks, grammaticality judgment and gloss prediction, and we explore what kind of grammatical knowledge helps by introducing a typological feature prompt that achieves leading results on these more relevant tasks. We thus emphasise the importance of task-appropriate data for XLR languages: parallel examples for translation, and grammatical data for linguistic tasks. As we find no evidence that long-context LLMs can make effective use of grammatical explanations for XLR translation, we conclude data collection for multilingual XLR tasks such as translation is best focused on parallel data over linguistic description. Seth Aycock, David Stap, Christof Monz, Khalil Sima'an |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2025 | MMTEB: Massive Multilingual Text Embedding BenchmarkabstractText embeddings are typically evaluated on a narrow set of tasks, limited in terms of languages, domains, and task types. To circumvent this limitation and to provide a more comprehensive evaluation, we introduce the Massive Multilingual Text Embedding Benchmark (MMTEB) -- a large-scale community-driven initiative expanding MTEB to over 500 quality-controlled evaluation tasks across 1,000+ languages. MMTEB includes a wide range of challenging novel tasks such as instruction following, long-document retrieval, and code retrieval, and represents the largest multilingual collection of evaluation tasks for embedding models to date. We use this collection to construct multiple highly multilingual benchmarks. We evaluate a representative set of models on these benchmarks.
Our findings indicate that, while LLM-based models can achieve state-of-the-art performance on a subset of languages, the best-performing publicly available model across languages is the notably smaller, multilingual-e5-large-instruct.
Massive benchmarks often impose high computational demands, limiting accessibility, particularly for low-resource communities. To address this, we downsample tasks based on inter-task correlation (i.e., selecting only a diverse set of tasks) while preserving relative rankings.
We further optimize tasks such as retrieval by sampling hard negatives, creating smaller but effective splits. These optimizations allow us to introduce benchmarks at a significantly lower computational cost. For instance, we introduce a new zero-shot English benchmark that maintains a similar ordering at a fraction of the cost. Kenneth C. Enevoldsen, Isaac Chung, Imene Kerboua, Márton Kardos, Ashwin Mathur, David Stap, Jay Gala, Wissam Siblini, Dominik Krzeminski, Genta Indra Winata, Saba Sturua, Saiteja Utpala, Mathieu Ciancone, Marion Schaeffer, Diganta Misra, Shreeya Dhakal, Jonathan Rystrøm, Roman Solomatin, Omer Veysel Cagatan, Akash Kundu |
ICLR | 6 |
| 2024 | The Fine-Tuning Paradox: Boosting Translation Quality Without Sacrificing LLM AbilitiesabstractFine-tuning large language models (LLMs) for machine translation has shown improvements in overall translation quality.However, it is unclear what is the impact of fine-tuning on desirable LLM behaviors that are not present in neural machine translation models, such as steerability, inherent document-level translation abilities, and the ability to produce less literal translations.We perform an extensive translation evaluation on the LLaMA and Falcon family of models with model size ranging from 7 billion up to 65 billion parameters.Our results show that while fine-tuning improves the general translation quality of LLMs, several abilities degrade.In particular, we observe a decline in the ability to perform formality steering, to produce technical translations through few-shot examples, and to perform documentlevel translation.On the other hand, we observe that the model produces less literal translations after fine-tuning on parallel data.We show that by including monolingual data as part of the fine-tuning data we can maintain the abilities while simultaneously enhancing overall translation quality.Our findings emphasize the need for fine-tuning strategies that preserve the benefits of LLMs for machine translation. David Stap, Eva Hasler, William J. Byrne, Christof Monz, Ke Tran |
ACL (1) | 1 |
| 2023 | Multilingual k-Nearest-Neighbor Machine Translationabstractk-nearest-neighbor machine translation has demonstrated remarkable improvements in machine translation quality by creating a datastore of cached examples.However, these improvements have been limited to high-resource language pairs, with large datastores, and remain a challenge for low-resource languages.In this paper, we address this issue by combining representations from multiple languages into a single datastore.Our results consistently demonstrate substantial improvements not only in low-resource translation quality (up to +3.6 BLEU), but also for high-resource translation quality (up to +0.5 BLEU).Our experiments show that it is possible to create multilingual datastores that are a quarter of the size, achieving a 5.3x speed improvement, by using linguistic similarities for datastore creation.1 David Stap, Christof Monz |
EMNLP | 1 |
| 2023 | Improving Domain Robustness in Neural Machine Translation with Fused Topic Knowledge EmbeddingsabstractDomain robustness is a key challenge for Neural Machine Translation (NMT). Translating text from a different distribution than the training set requires the NMT models to generalize well to unseen domains. In this work we propose a novel way to address domain robustness, by fusing external topic knowledge into the NMT architecture. We employ a pretrained denoising autoencoder and fuse topic information into the system during continued pretraining, and finetuning of the model on the downstream NMT task. Our results show that incorporating external topic knowledge, as well as additional pretraining can improve the out-of-domain performance of NMT models. The proposed methodology meets state-of-the-art on out-of-domain performance. Our analysis shows that a low overlap between the pretraining and finetuning corpora, as well as the quality of topic representations help the NMT systems become more robust under domain shift. Danai Xezonaki, Talaat Khalil, David Stap, Brandon Denis |
MTSummit (1) | 3 |
| 2022 | Super-NaturalInstructions: Generalization via Declarative Instructions on 1600+ NLP TasksabstractYizhong Wang, Swaroop Mishra, Pegah Alipoormolabashi, Yeganeh Kordi, Amirreza Mirzaei, Atharva Naik, Arjun Ashok, Arut Selvan Dhanasekaran, Anjana Arunkumar, David Stap, Eshaan Pathak, Giannis Karamanolakis, Haizhi Lai, Ishan Purohit, Ishani Mondal, Jacob Anderson, Kirby Kuznia, Krima Doshi, Kuntal Kumar Pal, Maitreya Patel, Mehrad Moradshahi, Mihir Parmar, Mirali Purohit, Neeraj Varshney, Phani Rohitha Kaza, Pulkit Verma, Ravsehaj Singh Puri, Rushang Karia, Savan Doshi, Shailaja Keyur Sampat, Siddhartha Mishra, Sujan Reddy A, Sumanta Patro, Tanay Dixit, Xudong Shen. Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 2022. Yizhong Wang, Swaroop Mishra, Pegah Alipoormolabashi, Yeganeh Kordi, Amirreza Mirzaei, Atharva Naik, Arjun Ashok, Arut Selvan Dhanasekaran, Anjana Arunkumar, David Stap, Eshaan Pathak, Giannis Karamanolakis, Haizhi Gary Lai, Ishan Purohit, Ishani Mondal, Jacob Anderson, Kirby Kuznia, Krima Doshi, Kuntal Kumar Pal, Maitreya Patel, Mehrad Moradshahi, Mihir Parmar, Mirali Purohit, Neeraj Varshney, Phani Rohitha Kaza, Pulkit Verma 0001, Ravsehaj Singh Puri, Rushang Karia, Savan Doshi, Shailaja Sampat, Siddhartha Mishra, Sujan Reddy A, Sumanta Patro, Tanay Dixit |
EMNLP | 10 |