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

Miles Stanley

dblp:429/6766 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 67% Information extraction and text analysis · 33%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › dataset bias
annotation bias
1.012026
Investigating Vaccine Buyer's Remorse: Post-Vaccination Decision Regret in COVID-19 Social Media Using Politically Diverse Human Annotation · AAAI 2026
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness
1.012026
Investigating Vaccine Buyer's Remorse: Post-Vaccination Decision Regret in COVID-19 Social Media Using Politically Diverse Human Annotation · AAAI 2026
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
social media text analysis
1.012026
Investigating Vaccine Buyer's Remorse: Post-Vaccination Decision Regret in COVID-19 Social Media Using Politically Diverse Human Annotation · AAAI 2026

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

large language model · 2.0human annotation · 2.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Investigating Vaccine Buyer's Remorse: Post-Vaccination Decision Regret in COVID-19 Social Media Using Politically Diverse Human Annotation
abstract
A significant gap exists in datasets regarding post-COVID-19 vaccination experiences, particularly “vaccine buyer's remorse”. Understanding the prevalence and nature of vaccine regret, whether based on personal or vicarious experiences, is vital for addressing vaccine hesitancy and refining public health communication. In this paper, we curate a novel dataset from a large YouTube news corpus capturing COVID-19 vaccination experiences, and construct a benchmark subset focused on vaccine regret, annotated by a politically diverse panel to account for the subjective and often politicized nature of the topic. We utilize large language models (LLMs) to identify posts expressing vaccine regret, analyze the reasons behind this regret, and quantify its occurrence in both first and second-person accounts. This paper aims to (1) quantify the prevalence of vaccine regret; (2) identify common reasons for this sentiment; (3) analyze differences between first-person and vicarious experiences; and (4) assess potential biases introduced by different LLMs. We find that while vaccine buyer's remorse appears in only
Miles Stanley, Soumyajit Datta, Ashiqur R. KhudaBukhsh
AAAI1