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

Siddhant Bharti

dblp:278/3575 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-6379-5232ORCID · reported

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1

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
3 papers
Language models and text generation · 46% Trustworthy machine learning · 25% Representation and self-supervised learning · 19%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Mathematical optimization · 100%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model
0.912025
Tool Preferences in Agentic LLMs are Unreliable · EMNLP 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
hallucination detection
0.812024
LLM-Check: Investigating Detection of Hallucinations in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation analysis
hidden state analysis
0.812024
LLM-Check: Investigating Detection of Hallucinations in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.812024
LLM-Check: Investigating Detection of Hallucinations in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › probabilistic inference
graphical model inference
0.412020
An Inference Algorithm for Multi-label MRF-MAP Problems with Clique Size 100 · ECCV (20) 2020
Mathematical optimization
discrete optimization
0.412020
An Inference Algorithm for Multi-label MRF-MAP Problems with Clique Size 100 · ECCV (20) 2020
Mathematical optimization › discrete optimization
energy minimization
0.412020
An Inference Algorithm for Multi-label MRF-MAP Problems with Clique Size 100 · ECCV (20) 2020
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.312025
Tool Preferences in Agentic LLMs are Unreliable · EMNLP 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
retrieval-augmented generation
0.212024
LLM-Check: Investigating Detection of Hallucinations in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2024

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

empirical evaluation · 0.9agentic benchmarking · 0.9output probability analysis · 0.8attention map analysis · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Tool Preferences in Agentic LLMs are Unreliable
abstract
Kazem Faghih, Wenxiao Wang, Yize Cheng, Siddhant Bharti, Gaurang Sriramanan, Sriram Balasubramanian, Parsa Hosseini, Soheil Feizi. Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 2025.
Kazem Faghih, Wenxiao Wang 0002, Yize Cheng, Siddhant Bharti, Gaurang Sriramanan, Sriram Balasubramanian, Parsa Hosseini, Soheil Feizi
EMNLP4
2024 LLM-Check: Investigating Detection of Hallucinations in Large Language Models
abstract
While Large Language Models (LLMs) have become immensely popular due to their outstanding performance on a broad range of tasks, these models are prone to producing hallucinations— outputs that are fallacious or fabricated yet often appear plausible or tenable at a glance. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive investigation into the nature of hallucinations within LLMs and furthermore explore effective techniques for detecting such inaccuracies in various real-world settings. Prior approaches to detect hallucinations in LLM outputs, such as consistency checks or retrieval-based methods, typically assume access to multiple model responses or large databases. These techniques, however, tend to be computationally expensive in practice, thereby limiting their applicability to real-time analysis. In contrast, in this work, we seek to identify hallucinations within a single response in both white-box and black-box settings by analyzing the internal hidden states, attention maps, and output prediction probabilities of an auxiliary LLM. In addition, we also study hallucination detection in scenarios where ground-truth references are also available, such as in the setting of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG). We demonstrate that the proposed detection methods are extremely compute-efficient, with speedups of up to 45x and 450x over other baselines, while achieving significant improvements in detection performance over diverse datasets.
Gaurang Sriramanan, Siddhant Bharti, Vinu Sankar Sadasivan, Shoumik Saha, Priyatham Kattakinda, Soheil Feizi
NeurIPS2
2020 An Inference Algorithm for Multi-label MRF-MAP Problems with Clique Size 100
Ishant Shanu, Siddhant Bharti, Chetan Arora 0001, S. N. Maheshwari
ECCV (20)2