Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Xingyu Dang
dblp:348/8880
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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 · 67% Learning theory · 33% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Information retrieval · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
chain-of-thought reasoning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | RNNs are not Transformers (Yet): The Key Bottleneck on In-Context Retrieval · ICLR 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › retrieval augmentation
in-context retrieval |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | RNNs are not Transformers (Yet): The Key Bottleneck on In-Context Retrieval · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory
representational capacity |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | RNNs are not Transformers (Yet): The Key Bottleneck on In-Context Retrieval · ICLR 2025 |
Information retrieval
retrieval-augmented generation |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | RNNs are not Transformers (Yet): The Key Bottleneck on In-Context Retrieval · ICLR 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
theoretical analysis · 1.7synthetic experiments · 1.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | RNNs are not Transformers (Yet): The Key Bottleneck on In-Context RetrievalabstractThis paper investigates the gap in representation powers of Transformers and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), which are more memory efficient than Transformers. We aim to understand whether RNNs can match the performance of Transformers, particularly when enhanced with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. Our theoretical analysis reveals that CoT improves RNNs but is insufficient to close the gap with Transformers. A key bottleneck lies in the inability of RNNs to perfectly retrieve information from the context, even with CoT:
for several tasks that explicitly or implicitly require this capability, such as associative recall and determining if a graph is a tree, we prove that RNNs are not expressive enough to solve the tasks while Transformers can solve them with ease.
Conversely, we prove that adopting techniques to enhance the in-context retrieval capability of RNNs, including Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and adding a single Transformer layer, can elevate RNNs to be capable of solving all polynomial-time solvable problems with CoT, hence closing the representation gap with Transformers. We validate our theory on synthetic and natural language experiments. Kaiyue Wen, Xingyu Dang, Kaifeng Lyu |
ICLR | 2 |