Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Dmitry Lipin
dblp:283/4309
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 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
1 paper |
Question answering and dialogue systems · 67% Deep learning architectures and training · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems
intent detection |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Revisiting Mahalanobis Distance for Transformer-Based Out-of-Domain Detection · AAAI 2021 |
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems › intent detection
out-of-domain detection |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Revisiting Mahalanobis Distance for Transformer-Based Out-of-Domain Detection · AAAI 2021 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
transformer |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Revisiting Mahalanobis Distance for Transformer-Based Out-of-Domain Detection · AAAI 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
transformer fine-tuning · 0.5mahalanobis distance · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Revisiting Mahalanobis Distance for Transformer-Based Out-of-Domain DetectionabstractReal-life applications, heavily relying on machine learning, such as dialog systems, demand for out-of-domain detection methods. Intent classification models should be equipped with a mechanism to distinguish seen intents from unseen ones so that the dialog agent is capable of rejecting the latter and avoiding undesired behavior. However, despite increasing attention paid to the task, the best practices for out-of-domain intent detection have not yet been fully established. This paper conducts a thorough comparison of out-of-domain intent detection methods. We prioritize the methods, not requiring access to out-of-domain data during training, gathering of which is extremely time- and labor-consuming due to lexical and stylistic variation of user utterances. We evaluate multiple contextual encoders and methods, proven to be efficient, on three common datasets for intent classification, expanded with out-of-domain utterances. Our main findings show that fine-tuning Transformer-based encoders on in-domain data leads to superior results. Mahalanobis distance, together with utterance representations, derived from Transformer-based encoders, outperform other methods by a wide margin(1-5% in terms of AUROC) and establish new state-of-the-art results for all datasets. The broader analysis shows that the reason for success lies in the fact that the fine-tuned Transformer is capable of constructing homogeneous representations of in-domain utterances, revealing geometrical disparity to out of domain utterances. In turn, the Mahalanobis distance captures this disparity easily. Alexander Podolskiy, Dmitry Lipin, Andrey Bout, Ekaterina Artemova, Irina Piontkovskaya |
AAAI | 2 |