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

Xiaoou Wang

dblp:300/1722 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
2as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-7040-5383ORCID · corroborated

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 2 first-author · 4 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 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
2 papers
Information extraction and text analysis · 52% Language models and text generation · 26% Trustworthy machine learning · 17%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › fact-checking
explainable fact-checking
0.912025
SAFE: Structured Argumentation for Fact-checking with Explanations · IJCAI 2025
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
fact-checking
0.912025
SAFE: Structured Argumentation for Fact-checking with Explanations · IJCAI 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
text summarization
0.912025
SAFE: Structured Argumentation for Fact-checking with Explanations · IJCAI 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.612022
Is Attention Explanation? An Introduction to the Debate · ACL (1) 2022
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
attention mechanism
0.212022
Is Attention Explanation? An Introduction to the Debate · ACL (1) 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

joint training · 0.9evidence retrieval · 0.9attention analysis · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 SAFE: Structured Argumentation for Fact-checking with Explanations
abstract
Explainable fact-checking plays a vital role in the fight against disinformation in today’s digital landscape. With the increasing volume of unverified content online, providing justifications for fact-checking has become essential to help users make informed decisions. While recent studies provide user-friendly explanations through abstractive or extractive summarization, they often assume the availability of human-written fact-checking articles, which is not always the case. This demo introduces SAFE, an argument-based framework designed to enhance both fact-checking and its justification. Specifically, SAFE offers three key features: i) producing argument-structured summaries of human-written fact-checking articles, ii) in the absence of human-written articles, generating structured summaries based on evidence retrieved from a corpus through a jointly trained summarization and evidence retrieval system, and iii) assessing the truthfulness of a claim by analyzing the structured summary.
Xiaoou Wang, Elena Cabrio, Serena Villata
IJCAI1
2023 Argument and Counter-Argument Generation: A Critical Survey
Xiaoou Wang, Elena Cabrio, Serena Villata
NLDB1
2022 Is Attention Explanation? An Introduction to the Debate
abstract
Adrien Bibal, Rémi Cardon, David Alfter, Rodrigo Wilkens, Xiaoou Wang, Thomas François, Patrick Watrin. Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2022.
Adrien Bibal, Rémi Cardon, David Alfter, Rodrigo Wilkens, Xiaoou Wang, Thomas François, Patrick Watrin
ACL (1)5
2022 FABRA: French Aggregator-Based Readability Assessment toolkit
abstract
In this paper, we present the FABRA: readability toolkit based on the aggregation of a large number of readability predictor variables. The toolkit is implemented as a service-oriented architecture, which obviates the need for installation, and simplifies its integration into other projects. We also perform a set of experiments to show which features are most predictive on two different corpora, and how the use of aggregators improves performance over standard feature-based readability prediction. Our experiments show that, for the explored corpora, the most important predictors for native texts are measures of lexical diversity, dependency counts and text coherence, while the most important predictors for foreign texts are syntactic variables illustrating language development, as well as features linked to lexical sophistication. FABRA: have the potential to support new research on readability assessment for French.
Rodrigo Wilkens, David Alfter, Xiaoou Wang, Alice Pintard, Anaïs Tack, Kevin P. Yancey, Thomas François
LREC3