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

António Loison

dblp:270/0744 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Information retrieval · 100%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Multimedia analysis and retrieval · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Information retrieval › evaluation › text generation evaluation
retrieval-augmented generation evaluation
1.012026
ViDoRe V3: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Retrieval Augmented Generation in Complex Real-World Scenarios · ACL (1) 2026
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 ViDoRe V3: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Retrieval Augmented Generation in Complex Real-World Scenarios
abstract
António Loison, Quentin Macé, Antoine Edy, Victor Xing, Tom Balough, Gabriel de Souza P. Moreira, Bo Liu, Manuel Faysse, Celine Hudelot, Gautier Viaud. Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2026.
António Loison, Quentin Macé, Antoine Edy, Victor Xing, Tom Balough, Gabriel de Souza Pereira Moreira, Manuel Faysse, Céline Hudelot, Gautier Viaud
ACL (1)1
2025 GroUSE: A Benchmark to Evaluate Evaluators in Grounded Question Answering
abstract
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has emerged as a common paradigm to use Large Language Models (LLMs) alongside private and up-to-date knowledge bases. In this work, we address the challenges of using LLM-as-a-Judge when evaluating grounded answers generated by RAG systems. To assess the calibration and discrimination capabilities of judge models, we identify 7 generator failure modes and introduce GroUSE (Grounded QA Unitary Scoring of Evaluators), a meta-evaluation benchmark of 144 unit tests. This benchmark reveals that existing automated RAG evaluation frameworks often overlook important failure modes, even when using GPT-4 as a judge. To improve on the current design of automated RAG evaluation frameworks, we propose a novel pipeline and find that while closed models perform well on GroUSE, state-of-the-art open-source judges do not generalize to our proposed criteria, despite strong correlation with GPT-4’s judgement. Our findings suggest that correlation with GPT-4 is an incomplete proxy for the practical performance of judge models and should be supplemented with evaluations on unit tests for precise failure mode detection. We further show that finetuning Llama-3 on GPT-4’s reasoning traces significantly boosts its evaluation capabilities, improving upon both correlation with GPT-4’s evaluations and calibration on reference situations
Sacha Muller, António Loison, Bilel Omrani, Gautier Viaud
COLING2