Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Leila Pishdad
dblp:70/8027
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
3as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-7825-5757ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 3 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Computer networks · 1 · 1 first-author
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 · 43% Question answering and dialogue systems · 22% Trustworthy machine learning · 22% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Information retrieval · 100% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
chain-of-thought reasoning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Can LLMs Reason Abstractly Over Math Word Problems Without CoT? Disentangling Abstract Formulation From Arithmetic Computation · EMNLP 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
mathematical reasoning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Can LLMs Reason Abstractly Over Math Word Problems Without CoT? Disentangling Abstract Formulation From Arithmetic Computation · EMNLP 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems
math word problem solving |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Can LLMs Reason Abstractly Over Math Word Problems Without CoT? Disentangling Abstract Formulation From Arithmetic Computation · EMNLP 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
mechanistic interpretability |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Can LLMs Reason Abstractly Over Math Word Problems Without CoT? Disentangling Abstract Formulation From Arithmetic Computation · EMNLP 2025 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › neural network representation learning
deep representation learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | RankMI: A Mutual Information Maximizing Ranking Loss · CVPR 2020 |
Information retrieval
image retrieval |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | RankMI: A Mutual Information Maximizing Ranking Loss · CVPR 2020 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
contrastive learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | RankMI: A Mutual Information Maximizing Ranking Loss · CVPR 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
disentangled evaluation · 0.9causal patching · 0.9triplet loss · 0.9ranking loss · 0.9mutual information maximization · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Can LLMs Reason Abstractly Over Math Word Problems Without CoT? Disentangling Abstract Formulation From Arithmetic ComputationabstractFinal-answer-based metrics are commonly used for evaluating large language models (LLMs) on math word problems, often taken as proxies for reasoning ability. However, such metrics conflate two distinct sub-skills: abstract formulation (capturing mathematical relationships using expressions) and arithmetic computation (executing the calculations). Through a disentangled evaluation on GSM8K and SVAMP, we find that the final-answer accuracy of Llama-3 and Qwen2.5 (1B-32B) without CoT is overwhelmingly bottlenecked by the arithmetic computation step and not by the abstract formulation step. Contrary to the common belief, we show that CoT primarily aids in computation, with limited impact on abstract formulation. Mechanistically, we show that these two skills are composed conjunctively even in a single forward pass without any reasoning steps via an abstract-then-compute mechanism: models first capture problem abstractions, then handle computation. Causal patching confirms these abstractions are present, transferable, composable, and precede computation. These behavioural and mechanistic findings highlight the need for disentangled evaluation to accurately assess LLM reasoning and to guide future improvements. Ziling Cheng, Meng Cao 0003, Leila Pishdad, Yanshuai Cao, Jackie Chi Kit Cheung |
EMNLP | 3 |
| 2022 | SAGE: Saliency-Guided Mixup with Optimal Rearrangements
Avery Ma, Nikita Dvornik, Leila Pishdad, Konstantinos G. Derpanis, Afsaneh Fazly |
BMVC | 4 |
| 2020 | How coherent are neural models of coherence?abstractDespite the recent advances in coherence modelling, most such models including state-of-the-art neural ones, are evaluated on either contrived proxy tasks such as the standard order discrimination benchmark, or tasks that require special expert annotation.Moreover, most evaluations are conducted on small newswire corpora.To address these shortcomings, in this paper we propose four generic evaluation tasks that draw on different aspects of coherence at both the lexical and document levels, and can be applied to any corpora.In designing these tasks, we aim at capturing coherence-specific properties, such as the correct use of discourse connectives, lexical cohesion, as well as the overall temporal and causal consistency among events and participants in a story.Importantly, our proposed tasks either rely on automatically-generated data, or data annotated for other purposes, hence alleviating the need for annotation specifically targeted to the task of coherence modelling.We perform experiments with several existing state-of-the-art neural models of coherence on these tasks, across large corpora from different domains, including newswire, dialogue, as well as narrative and instructional text.Our findings point to a strong need for revisiting the common practices in the development and evaluation of coherence models. Leila Pishdad, Federico Fancellu, Afsaneh Fazly |
COLING | 1 |
| 2020 | RankMI: A Mutual Information Maximizing Ranking LossabstractWe introduce an information-theoretic loss function, RankMI, and an associated training algorithm for deep representation learning for image retrieval. Our proposed framework consists of alternating updates to a network that estimates the divergence between distance distributions of matching and non-matching pairs of learned embeddings, and an embedding network that maximizes this estimate via sampled negatives. In addition, under this information-theoretic lens we draw connections between RankMI and commonly-used ranking losses, e.g., triplet loss. We extensively evaluate RankMI on several standard image retrieval datasets, namely, CUB-200-2011, CARS-196, and Stanford Online Products. Our method achieves competitive results or significant improvements over previous reported results on all datasets. Mete Kemertas, Leila Pishdad, Konstantinos G. Derpanis, Afsaneh Fazly |
CVPR | 2 |
| 2013 | Optimal importance density for position location problem with non-Gaussian noiseabstractState-space representation of positioning problems has enabled the use of particle filters to probabilistically estimate the location from the noisy sensor measurements. However, in particle filtering, the choice of the motion and sensor models, as well as the importance density used, are crucial for a good approximation. In this work, we have used Gaussian Mixtures to model the prior and likelihood densities, as they can be used for a wide range of distributions and can capture the multimodality of the densities. Additionally, with GMM prior and likelihood densities, we were able to evaluate and use the Optimal Importance Density for particle filters, which resolves the degeneracy of particles and sample impoverishment. We have provided simulation results based on field measurements to illustrate the validity of our models and the improvements made by using our proposed importance density. Leila Pishdad, Fabrice Labeau |
WCNC | 1 |
| 2010 | A fair optimization scheduling scheme for IEEE 802.16 networks in multimedia applications
Leila Pishdad, Hamid R. Rabiee 0001, Nasim Mirarmandehi |
J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent. | 1 |