Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sherry Yan
dblp:242/9388
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as 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 · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Data mining · 91% Machine learning and data management · 9% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Data mining › multidimensional data analysis › multiway data analysis › tensor analysis › tensor factorization
CP decomposition |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | SWIFT: Scalable Wasserstein Factorization for Sparse Nonnegative Tensors · AAAI 2021 |
Data mining › multidimensional data analysis › multiway data analysis › tensor analysis › tensor factorization
non-negative tensor factorization |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | SWIFT: Scalable Wasserstein Factorization for Sparse Nonnegative Tensors · AAAI 2021 |
Data mining › multidimensional data analysis › multiway data analysis › tensor analysis
tensor factorization |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | SWIFT: Scalable Wasserstein Factorization for Sparse Nonnegative Tensors · AAAI 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
wasserstein distance · 0.5optimal transport · 0.5CP factorization · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Prompt engineering on leveraging large language models in generating response to InBasket messagesabstractOBJECTIVES: Large Language Models (LLMs) have been proposed as a solution to address high volumes of Patient Medical Advice Requests (PMARs). This study addresses whether LLMs can generate high quality draft responses to PMARs that satisfies both patients and clinicians with prompt engineering. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We designed a novel human-involved iterative processes to train and validate prompts to LLM in creating appropriate responses to PMARs. GPT-4 was used to generate response to the messages. We updated the prompts, and evaluated both clinician and patient acceptance of LLM-generated draft responses at each iteration, and tested the optimized prompt on independent validation data sets. The optimized prompt was implemented in the electronic health record production environment and tested by 69 primary care clinicians. RESULTS: After 3 iterations of prompt engineering, physician acceptance of draft suitability increased from 62% to 84% (P <.001) in the validation dataset (N = 200), and 74% of drafts in the test dataset were rated as "helpful." Patients also noted significantly increased favorability of message tone (78%) and overall quality (80%) for the optimized prompt compared to the original prompt in the training dataset, patients were unable to differentiate human and LLM-generated draft PMAR responses for 76% of the messages, in contrast to the earlier preference for human-generated responses. Majority (72%) of clinicians believed it can reduce cognitive load in dealing with InBasket messages. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Informed by clinician and patient feedback synergistically, tuning in LLM prompt alone can be effective in creating clinically relevant and useful draft responses to PMARs. Sherry Yan, Wendi Knapp, Andrew Leong, Sarira Kadkhodazadeh, Veena G. Jones, Robert Clark, David Grattendick, Lisa Hladik, Lawrence M. Fagan, Albert Chan |
J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc. | 1 |
| 2021 | SWIFT: Scalable Wasserstein Factorization for Sparse Nonnegative TensorsabstractExisting tensor factorization methods assume that the input tensor follows some specific distribution (i.e. Poisson, Bernoulli, and Gaussian), and solve the factorization by minimizing some empirical loss functions defined based on the corresponding distribution. However, it suffers from several drawbacks: 1) In reality, the underlying distributions are complicated and unknown, making it infeasible to be approximated by a simple distribution. 2) The correlation across dimensions of the input tensor is not well utilized, leading to sub-optimal performance. Although heuristics were proposed to incorporate such correlation as side information under Gaussian distribution, they can not easily be generalized to other distributions. Thus, a more principled way of utilizing the correlation in tensor factorization models is still an open challenge. Without assuming any explicit distribution, we formulate the tensor factorization as an optimal transport problem with Wasserstein distance, which can handle non-negative inputs. We introduce SWIFT, which minimizes the Wasserstein distance that measures the distance between the input tensor and that of the reconstruction. In particular, we define the N-th order tensor Wasserstein loss for the widely used tensor CP factorization and derive the optimization algorithm that minimizes it. By leveraging sparsity structure and different equivalent formulations for optimizing computational efficiency, SWIFT is as scalable as other well-known CP algorithms. Using the factor matrices as features, SWIFT achieves up to 9.65% and 11.31% relative improvement over baselines for downstream prediction tasks. Under the noisy conditions, SWIFT achieves up to 15% and 17% relative improvements over the best competitors for the prediction tasks. Ardavan Afshar, Kejing Yin, Sherry Yan, Cheng Qian 0001, Joyce C. Ho, Haesun Park, Jimeng Sun 0001 |
AAAI | 3 |