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

Elodie Vanzeveren

dblp:425/8017 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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
Information extraction and text analysis · 77% Transfer learning and domain adaptation · 23%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › text classification
readability assessment
0.912025
Assessing French Readability for Adults with Low Literacy: A Global and Local Perspective · EMNLP 2025
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
fine-tuning
0.312025
Assessing French Readability for Adults with Low Literacy: A Global and Local Perspective · EMNLP 2025

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

linguistic features · 0.9generative language model · 0.9fine-tuning · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Assessing French Readability for Adults with Low Literacy: A Global and Local Perspective
abstract
This study presents a novel approach to assessing French text readability for adults with low literacy skills, addressing both global (full-text) and local (segment-level) difficulty.We also introduce a dataset of 461 texts annotated using a difficulty scale developed specifically for this population.Using this corpus, we conducted a systematic comparison of key readability modeling approaches, including machine learning techniques based on linguistic variables, fine-tuning of CamemBERT, a hybrid approach combining CamemBERT with linguistic variables, and the use of generative language models (LLMs) to carry out readability assessment at global and local level.
Wafa Aissa, Thibault Bañeras-Roux, Elodie Vanzeveren, Lingyun Gao, Rodrigo Wilkens, Thomas François
EMNLP3