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

Disha Shrivastava

dblp:203/9100 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
2as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0008-9008-037XORCID · corroborated

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-author · 3 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 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
2 papers
Language models and text generation · 72% Reinforcement learning · 28%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-AI interaction · 61% Design research and methods · 39%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Program synthesis and code generation · 100%

Topics — the 10 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › online decision making
online reinforcement learning
0.912025
Training Language Models to Self-Correct via Reinforcement Learning · ICLR 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model reasoning
self-correction
0.912025
Training Language Models to Self-Correct via Reinforcement Learning · ICLR 2025
Human-AI interaction
AI-assisted writing
0.812024
A Design Space for Intelligent and Interactive Writing Assistants · CHI 2024
Design research and methods
design space
0.812024
A Design Space for Intelligent and Interactive Writing Assistants · CHI 2024
Human-AI interaction › AI-assisted writing
writing assistant
0.812024
A Design Space for Intelligent and Interactive Writing Assistants · CHI 2024
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
code language models
0.712023
Repository-Level Prompt Generation for Large Language Models of Code · ICML 2023
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › prompting
prompt engineering
0.712023
Repository-Level Prompt Generation for Large Language Models of Code · ICML 2023
Program synthesis and code generation
code completion
0.712023
Repository-Level Prompt Generation for Large Language Models of Code · ICML 2023
Program synthesis and code generation
programming by example
0.512021
Learning to Combine Per-Example Solutions for Neural Program Synthesis · NeurIPS 2021
Design research and methods › research methodology
systematic review
0.212024
A Design Space for Intelligent and Interactive Writing Assistants · CHI 2024

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

prompt proposals · 1.3large language model · 1.3supervised fine-tuning · 0.9reinforcement learning · 0.9systematic review · 0.8community collaboration · 0.8neural network · 0.5multi-head attention · 0.5cross aggregation · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Training Language Models to Self-Correct via Reinforcement Learning
abstract
Self-correction is a highly desirable capability of large language models (LLMs), yet it has consistently been found to be largely ineffective in modern LLMs. Current methods for training self-correction typically depend on either multiple models, a more advanced model, or additional forms of supervision. To address these shortcomings, we develop a multi-turn online reinforcement learning (RL) approach, SCoRe, that significantly improves an LLM's self-correction ability using entirely self-generated data. To build SCoRe, we first show that variants of supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on offline model-generated correction traces are insufficient for instilling self-correction behavior. In particular, we observe that training via SFT either suffers from a distribution mismatch between the training data and the model's own responses or implicitly prefers only a certain mode of correction behavior that is often not effective at test time. SCoRe addresses these challenges by training under the model's own distribution of self-generated correction traces and using appropriate regularization to steer the learning process into learning a self-correction strategy that is effective at test time as opposed to simply fitting high-reward responses for a given prompt. This regularization prescribes running a first phase of RL on a base model to generate a policy initialization that is less susceptible to collapse and then using a reward bonus to amplify self-correction during training. When applied to Gemini 1.0 Pro and 1.5 Flash models, we find that SCoRe achieves state-of-the-art self-correction performance, improving the base models' self-correction by 15.6% and 9.1% respectively on the MATH and HumanEval benchmarks.
Aviral Kumar, Vincent Zhuang, Rishabh Agarwal, John D. Co-Reyes, Avi Singh, Kate Baumli, Shariq Iqbal, Colton Bishop, Rebecca Roelofs, Lei M. Zhang, Kay McKinney, Disha Shrivastava, Cosmin Paduraru, George Tucker, Doina Precup, Feryal M. P. Behbahani, Aleksandra Faust
ICLR13
2024 Do LLMs Meet the Needs of Software Tutorial Writers? Opportunities and Design Implications
abstract
Creating software tutorials involves developing accurate code examples and explanatory text that engages and informs the reader. Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate a strong capacity to generate both text and code, but their potential to assist tutorial writing is unknown. By interviewing and observing seven experienced writers using OpenAI playground as an exploration environment, we uncover design opportunities for leveraging LLMs in software tutorial writing. Our findings reveal background research, resource creation, and maintaining quality standards as critical areas where LLMs could significantly assist writers. We observe how tutorial writers generated tutorial content while exploring LLMs’ capabilities, formulating prompts, verifying LLM outputs, and reflecting on interaction goals and strategies. Our observation highlights that the unpredictability of LLM outputs and unintuitive interface design contributed to skepticism about LLM’s utility. Informed by these results, we contribute recommendations for designing LLM-based tutorial writing tools to mitigate usability challenges and harness LLMs’ full potential.
Avinash Bhat, Disha Shrivastava, Jin L. C. Guo
Conference on Designing Interactive Systems2
2024 A Design Space for Intelligent and Interactive Writing Assistants
abstract
In our era of rapid technological advancement, the research landscape for writing assistants has become increasingly fragmented across various research communities. We seek to address this challenge by proposing a design space as a structured way to examine and explore the multidimensional space of intelligent and interactive writing assistants. Through community collaboration, we explore five aspects of writing assistants: task, user, technology, interaction, and ecosystem. Within each aspect, we define dimensions and codes by systematically reviewing 115 papers, while leveraging the expertise of researchers in various disciplines. Our design space aims to offer researchers and designers a practical tool to navigate, comprehend, and compare the various possibilities of writing assistants, and aid in the design of new writing assistants.
Mina Lee 0002, Katy Ilonka Gero, John Joon Young Chung, Simon Buckingham Shum, Vipul Raheja, Hua Shen 0005, Subhashini Venugopalan, Thiemo Wambsganss, David Zhou, Emad A. Alghamdi, Tal August, Avinash Bhat, Madiha Zahrah Choksi, Senjuti Dutta, Jin L. C. Guo, Md. Naimul Hoque, Simon Knight 0001, Seyed Parsa Neshaei, Antonette Shibani, Disha Shrivastava, Lila Shroff, Agnia Sergeyuk, Jessi Stark, Sarah Sterman, Sitong Wang 0001, Antoine Bosselut, Daniel Buschek, Joseph Chee Chang, Sherol Chen, Max Kreminski, Joonsuk Park, Roy D. Pea, Eugenia Ha Rim Rho, Shannon Shen 0001, Pao Siangliulue
CHI21
2023 Repository-Level Prompt Generation for Large Language Models of Code
abstract
With the success of large language models (LLMs) of code and their use as code assistants (e.g. Codex used in GitHub Copilot), techniques for introducing domain-specific knowledge in the prompt design process become important. In this work, we propose a framework called Repo-Level Prompt Generator that learns to generate example-specific prompts using prompt proposals. The prompt proposals take context from the entire repository, thereby incorporating both the structure of the repository and the context from other relevant files (e.g. imports, parent class files). Our technique doesn't require any access to the weights of the LLM, making it applicable in cases where we only have black-box access to the LLM. We conduct experiments on the task of single-line code auto-completion using code repositories taken from Google Code archives. We demonstrate that an oracle constructed from our prompt proposals gives a relative improvement of 36% over Codex, showing the quality of these proposals. Further, we show that when we train a model to predict a prompt proposal, we can achieve significant performance gains over Codex and other baselines. We release our code, data, and trained checkpoints at: https://github.com/shrivastavadisha/repo_level_prompt_generation.
Disha Shrivastava, Hugo Larochelle, Daniel Tarlow
ICML1
2021 Learning to Combine Per-Example Solutions for Neural Program Synthesis
abstract
The goal of program synthesis from examples is to find a computer program that is consistent with a given set of input-output examples. Most learning-based approaches try to find a program that satisfies all examples at once. Our work, by contrast, considers an approach that breaks the problem into two stages: (a) find programs that satisfy only one example, and (b) leverage these per-example solutions to yield a program that satisfies all examples. We introduce the Cross Aggregator neural network module based on a multi-head attention mechanism that learns to combine the cues present in these per-example solutions to synthesize a global solution. Evaluation across programs of different lengths and under two different experimental settings reveal that when given the same time budget, our technique significantly improves the success rate over PCCoder [Zohar et. al 2018] and other ablation baselines.
Disha Shrivastava, Hugo Larochelle, Daniel Tarlow
NeurIPS1