VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Youfeng Liu
dblp:315/8244
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 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.
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Language models and text generation · 77% Question answering and dialogue systems · 23% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Information retrieval · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
instruction following |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | AGENTIF: Benchmarking Large Language Models Instruction Following Ability in Agentic Scenarios · NeurIPS 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › instruction following
instruction-following agents |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | AGENTIF: Benchmarking Large Language Models Instruction Following Ability in Agentic Scenarios · NeurIPS 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | AGENTIF: Benchmarking Large Language Models Instruction Following Ability in Agentic Scenarios · NeurIPS 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems › domain-specific question answering
legal question answering |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | LegalAgentBench: Evaluating LLM Agents in Legal Domain · ACL (1) 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
LLM agents |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | AGENTIF: Benchmarking Large Language Models Instruction Following Ability in Agentic Scenarios · NeurIPS 2025 |
Information retrieval › document retrieval › domain-specific retrieval › legal information retrieval
legal case retrieval |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | LegalAgentBench: Evaluating LLM Agents in Legal Domain · ACL (1) 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
LLM agents · 1.7code-based evaluation · 0.9LLM-based evaluation · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | LegalAgentBench: Evaluating LLM Agents in Legal DomainabstractHaitao Li, Junjie Chen, Jingli Yang, Qingyao Ai, Wei Jia, Youfeng Liu, Kai Lin, Yueyue Wu, Guozhi Yuan, Yiran Hu, Wuyue Wang, Yiqun Liu, Minlie Huang. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025. Haitao Li 0006, Jingli Yang, Qingyao Ai, Youfeng Liu, Yueyue Wu, Guozhi Yuan, Yiran Hu, Wuyue Wang, Yiqun Liu 0001, Minlie Huang |
ACL (1) | 6 |
| 2025 | AGENTIF: Benchmarking Large Language Models Instruction Following Ability in Agentic ScenariosabstractLarge Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated advanced capabilities in real-world agentic applications. Growing research efforts aim to develop LLM-based agents to address practical demands, introducing a new challenge: agentic scenarios often involve lengthy instructions with complex constraints, such as extended system prompts and detailed tool specifications. While adherence to such instructions is crucial for agentic applications, whether LLMs can reliably follow them remains underexplored. In this paper, we introduce AgentIF, the first benchmark for systematically evaluating LLM instruction following ability in agentic scenarios. AgentIF features three key characteristics: (1) Realistic, constructed from $50$ real-world agentic applications. (2) Long, averaging $1,723$ words with a maximum of $15,630$ words. (3) Complex, averaging $11.9$ constraints per instruction, covering diverse constraint types, such as tool specifications and condition constraints.To construct AgentIF, we collect $707$ human-annotated instructions across $50$ agentic tasks from industrial application agents and open-source agentic systems. For each instruction, we annotate the associated constraints and corresponding evaluation metrics, including code-based evaluation, LLM-based evaluation, and hybrid code-LLM evaluation.We use AgentIF to systematically evaluate existing advanced LLMs. We observe that current models generally perform poorly, especially in handling complex constraint structures and tool specifications. We further conduct error analysis and analytical experiments on instruction length and meta constraints, providing some findings about the failure modes of existing LLMs. We have released the code and data to facilitate future research. Yunjia Qi, Hao Peng 0015, Xiaozhi Wang, Amy Xin, Youfeng Liu, Bin Xu 0001, Lei Hou 0001, Juan-Zi Li |
NeurIPS | 5 |