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

Xurui Jin

dblp:301/3951 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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
3 papers
Graph learning · 46% Trustworthy machine learning · 30% Vision and language · 15%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 33% Medical and health informatics · 33% Computing education · 33%

Topics — the 10 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph augmentation
0.712023
Rethinking Explaining Graph Neural Networks via Non-parametric Subgraph Matching · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Graph learning
graph neural network
0.712023
Rethinking Explaining Graph Neural Networks via Non-parametric Subgraph Matching · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
graph neural network explanation
0.712023
Rethinking Explaining Graph Neural Networks via Non-parametric Subgraph Matching · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.712023
Rethinking Explaining Graph Neural Networks via Non-parametric Subgraph Matching · ICML 2023
Computer vision › Vision and language › vision-language model
prompt learning
0.712023
Multi-level Protein Structure Pre-training via Prompt Learning · ICLR 2023
Machine learning › Graph learning › graph matching
subgraph matching
0.712023
Rethinking Explaining Graph Neural Networks via Non-parametric Subgraph Matching · ICML 2023
Medical and health informatics
biomedical natural language processing
0.712023
An extensive benchmark study on biomedical text generation and mining with ChatGPT · Bioinform. 2023
Computing education
large language model evaluation
0.712023
An extensive benchmark study on biomedical text generation and mining with ChatGPT · Bioinform. 2023
Bioinformatics and computational biology
protein structure prediction
0.712023
Multi-level Protein Structure Pre-training via Prompt Learning · ICLR 2023
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
pre-training
0.212023
Multi-level Protein Structure Pre-training via Prompt Learning · ICLR 2023

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

prompt engineering · 1.3multi-level pre-training · 1.3benchmarking · 1.3subgraph matching · 0.7node dropping · 0.7graph sampling · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Multi-level Protein Structure Pre-training via Prompt Learning
Qiang Zhang 0026, Shuangwei Hu, Xurui Jin, Zhichen Gong, Huajun Chen
ICLR5
2023 Rethinking Explaining Graph Neural Networks via Non-parametric Subgraph Matching
abstract
The success of graph neural networks (GNNs) provokes the question about explainability: “Which fraction of the input graph is the most determinant of the prediction?” Particularly, parametric explainers prevail in existing approaches because of their more robust capability to decipher the black-box (i.e., target GNNs). In this paper, based on the observation that graphs typically share some common motif patterns, we propose a novel non-parametric subgraph matching framework, dubbed MatchExplainer, to explore explanatory subgraphs. It couples the target graph with other counterpart instances and identifies the most crucial joint substructure by minimizing the node corresponding-based distance. Moreover, we note that present graph sampling or node-dropping methods usually suffer from the false positive sampling problem. To alleviate this issue, we design a new augmentation paradigm named MatchDrop. It takes advantage of MatchExplainer to fix the most informative portion of the graph and merely operates graph augmentations on the rest less informative part. Extensive experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets show the effectiveness of our MatchExplainer by outperforming all state-of-the-art parametric baselines with significant margins. Results also demonstrate that MatchDrop is a general scheme to be equipped with GNNs for enhanced performance. The code is available at https://github.com/smiles724/MatchExplainer.
Fang Wu 0002, Siyuan Li 0002, Xurui Jin, Yinghui Jiang, Dragomir R. Radev, Zhangming Niu, Stan Z. Li
ICML3
2023 An extensive benchmark study on biomedical text generation and mining with ChatGPT
abstract
MOTIVATION: In recent years, the development of natural language process (NLP) technologies and deep learning hardware has led to significant improvement in large language models (LLMs). The ChatGPT, the state-of-the-art LLM built on GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, shows excellent capabilities in general language understanding and reasoning. Researchers also tested the GPTs on a variety of NLP-related tasks and benchmarks and got excellent results. With exciting performance on daily chat, researchers began to explore the capacity of ChatGPT on expertise that requires professional education for human and we are interested in the biomedical domain. RESULTS: To evaluate the performance of ChatGPT on biomedical-related tasks, this article presents a comprehensive benchmark study on the use of ChatGPT for biomedical corpus, including article abstracts, clinical trials description, biomedical questions, and so on. Typical NLP tasks like named entity recognization, relation extraction, sentence similarity, question and answering, and document classification are included. Overall, ChatGPT got a BLURB score of 58.50 while the state-of-the-art model had a score of 84.30. Through a series of experiments, we demonstrated the effectiveness and versatility of ChatGPT in biomedical text understanding, reasoning and generation, and the limitation of ChatGPT build on GPT-3.5. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: All the datasets are available from BLURB benchmark https://microsoft.github.io/BLURB/index.html. The prompts are described in the article.
Qijie Chen, Haotong Sun, Yinghui Jiang, Ting Ran, Xurui Jin, Xianglu Xiao, Zhimin Lin, Hongming Chen 0001, Zhangming Niu
Bioinform.6