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

Fateme Hashemi Chaleshtori

dblp:340/5826 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
Language models and text generation · 91% Question answering and dialogue systems · 9%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
chain-of-thought reasoning
0.912025
Measuring Chain of Thought Faithfulness by Unlearning Reasoning Steps · EMNLP 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › trustworthy language model › large language model reliability
faithfulness
0.912025
Measuring Chain of Thought Faithfulness by Unlearning Reasoning Steps · EMNLP 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
knowledge editing
0.912025
Measuring Chain of Thought Faithfulness by Unlearning Reasoning Steps · EMNLP 2025
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems › reasoning-based question answering
multi-hop question answering
0.312025
Measuring Chain of Thought Faithfulness by Unlearning Reasoning Steps · EMNLP 2025

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

unlearning · 0.9parametric faithfulness measurement · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Measuring Chain of Thought Faithfulness by Unlearning Reasoning Steps
abstract
When prompted to think step-by-step, language models (LMs) produce a chain of thought (CoT), a sequence of reasoning steps that the model supposedly used to produce its prediction.Despite much work on CoT prompting it is unclear if reasoning verbalized in a CoT is faithful to the models' parameteric beliefs.We introduce a framework for measuring parametric faithfulness of generated reasoning, and propose Faithfulness by Unlearning Reasoning steps (FUR), an instance of this framework.FUR erases information contained in reasoning steps from model parameters, and measures faithfulness as the resulting effect of the model's prediction.Our experiments with four LMs and five multi-hop multi-choice question answering (MCQA) datasets show that FUR is frequently able to precisely change the underlying models' prediction for a given instance by unlearning key steps, indicating when a CoT is parametrically faithful.Further analysis shows that CoTs generated by models post-unlearning support different answers, hinting at a deeper effect of unlearning. 1
Martin Tutek, Fateme Hashemi Chaleshtori, Ana Marasovic, Yonatan Belinkov
EMNLP2