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.

Srividya Pranavi Potharaju

dblp:232/2365 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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
Language models and text generation · 50% Trustworthy machine learning · 50%

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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
model routing
0.812024
AutoMix: Automatically Mixing Language Models · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › verification
self-verification
0.812024
AutoMix: Automatically Mixing Language Models · NeurIPS 2024

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

few-shot self-verification · 0.8POMDP · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 AutoMix: Automatically Mixing Language Models
abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are now available from cloud API providers in various sizes and configurations. While this diversity offers a broad spectrum of choices, effectively leveraging the options to optimize computational cost and performance remains challenging. In this work, we present AutoMix, an approach that strategically routes queries to larger LMs, based on the approximate correctness of outputs from a smaller LM. Central to AutoMix are two key technical contributions. First, it has a few-shot self-verification mechanism, which estimates the reliability of its own outputs without requiring extensive training. Second, given that self-verification can be noisy, it employs a POMDP based router that can effectively select an appropriately sized model, based on answer confidence. Experiments across five language models and five challenging datasets show that Automix consistently surpasses strong baselines, reducing computational cost by over 50\% for comparable performance.
Pranjal Aggarwal, Aman Madaan, Ankit Anand, Srividya Pranavi Potharaju, Swaroop Mishra, Aditya Gupta 0001, Dheeraj Rajagopal, Karthik Kappaganthu, Yiming Yang 0002, Shyam Upadhyay, Manaal Faruqui, Mausam
NeurIPS4
2021 User-Initiated Repetition-Based Recovery in Multi-Utterance Dialogue Systems
abstract
Recognition errors are common in human communication. Similar errors often lead to unwanted behaviour in dialogue systems or virtual assistants. In human communication, we can recover from them by repeating misrecognized words or phrases; however in human-machine communication this recovery mechanism is not available. In this paper, we attempt to bridge this gap and present a system that allows a user to correct speech recognition errors in a virtual assistant by repeating misunderstood words. When a user repeats part of the phrase the system rewrites the original query to incorporate the correction. This rewrite allows the virtual assistant to understand the original query successfully. We present an end-to-end 2-step attention pointer network that can generate the the rewritten query by merging together the incorrectly understood utterance with the correction follow-up. We evaluate the model on data collected for this task and compare the proposed model to a rule-based baseline and a standard pointer network. We show that rewriting the original query is an effective way to handle repetition-based recovery and that the proposed model outperforms the rule based baseline, reducing Word Error Rate by 19% relative at 2% False Alarm Rate on annotated data.
Hoang Long Nguyen 0005, Vincent Renkens, Joris Pelemans, Srividya Pranavi Potharaju, Anil Kumar Nalamalapu, Murat Akbacak
Interspeech4