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

Jiawen Li 0003

dblp:78/11207-3 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0003-3684-4785ORCID · conflict

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-author · 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
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 62% Deep learning architectures and training · 38%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness › adversarial robustness
adversarial training
0.812024
DropAttack: A Random Dropped Weight Attack Adversarial Training for Natural Language Understanding · IEEE ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 2024
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
weight perturbation
0.812024
DropAttack: A Random Dropped Weight Attack Adversarial Training for Natural Language Understanding · IEEE ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
adversarial robustness
0.212024
DropAttack: A Random Dropped Weight Attack Adversarial Training for Natural Language Understanding · IEEE ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.212024
DropAttack: A Random Dropped Weight Attack Adversarial Training for Natural Language Understanding · IEEE ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 2024

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

gradient regularization · 0.8adversarial training · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 EPRD: Exploiting prior knowledge for evidence-providing automatic rumor detection
Jiawen Li 0003, Ronghui Li, Shiwen Ni, Hung-Yu Kao
Neurocomputing1
2024 DropAttack: A Random Dropped Weight Attack Adversarial Training for Natural Language Understanding
abstract
Adversarial training has been proven to be a powerful regularization technique to improve language models. In this work, we propose a novel randomdropped weightattackadversarial training method (DropAttack) for natural language understanding. Our DropAttack improves the generalization of models by minimizing the internal adversarial risk caused by a multitude of attack combinations. Specifically, DropAttack enhances the adversarial attack space by intentionally adding worst-case adversarial perturbations to the weight parameters and randomly dropping the specific proportion of attack perturbations. To extensively validate the effectiveness of DropAttack,12public English natural language understanding datasets were used. Experiments on the GLUE benchmark show that when DropAttack is applied only to the finetuning stage, it is able to improve the overall test scores of the BERT-base pre-trained model from 78.3 to 79.7 and RoBERTa-large pre-trained model from 88.1 to 88.8. Further, DropAttack also significantly improves models trained from scratch. Theoretical analysis reveals that DropAttack performs potential gradient regularization on the input and weight parameters of the model. Moreover, visualization experiments show that DropAttack can push the minimum risk of the neural network to a lower and flatter loss landscape.
Shiwen Ni, Jiawen Li 0003, Min Yang 0007, Hung-Yu Kao
IEEE ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process.2
2020 Exploiting Microblog Conversation Structures to Detect Rumors
abstract
As one of the most popular social media platforms, Twitter has become a primary source of information for many people.Unfortunately, both valid information and rumors are propagated on Twitter due to the lack of an automatic information verification system.Twitter users communicate by replying to other users' messages, forming a conversation structure.Using this structure, users can decide whether the information in the source tweet is a rumor by reading the tweet's replies, which voice other users' stances on the tweet.The majority of rumor detection researchers process such tweets based on time, ignoring the conversation structure.To reap the benefits of the Twitter conversation structure, we developed a model to detect rumors by modeling conversation structure as a graph.Thus, our model's improved representation of the conversation structure enhances its rumor detection accuracy.The experimental results on two rumor datasets show that our model outperforms several baseline models, including a state-of-theart model.
Jiawen Li 0003, Yudianto Sujana, Hung-Yu Kao
COLING1