Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Xingzhou Chen
dblp:349/8852
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0003-1631-5202ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 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
3 papers |
Language models and text generation · 64% Trustworthy machine learning · 28% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 7% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | StrucText-Eval: Evaluating Large Language Model's Reasoning Ability in Structure-Rich Text · ACL (1) 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › prompting › prompt engineering
prompt optimization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | GAPO: Learning Preferential Prompt through Generative Adversarial Policy Optimization · ACL (1) 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
alignment |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | GAPO: Learning Preferential Prompt through Generative Adversarial Policy Optimization · ACL (1) 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
preference optimization |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | GAPO: Learning Preferential Prompt through Generative Adversarial Policy Optimization · ACL (1) 2025 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
structured data understanding |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | StrucText-Eval: Evaluating Large Language Model's Reasoning Ability in Structure-Rich Text · ACL (1) 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
large language model evaluation · 1.0reinforcement learning · 0.9generative adversarial policy optimization · 0.9controlled complexity generation · 0.9automatic benchmark generation · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | The "Knowledge-Behavior Gap" in Cultural Taboo Safety of Large Language ModelsabstractYing He, Sihang Jiang, Xingzhou Chen, Zhouhong Gu, Yiwei Gu, Minggui HE, Shimin Tao, Mahongxia, Yanghua Xiao. Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2026. Ying He 0010, Sihang Jiang 0001, Xingzhou Chen, Zhouhong Gu, Yiwei Gu, Minggui He, Shimin Tao, Hongxia Ma, Yanghua Xiao |
ACL (1) | 3 |
| 2025 | GAPO: Learning Preferential Prompt through Generative Adversarial Policy OptimizationabstractZhouhong Gu, Xingzhou Chen, Xiaoran Shi, Tao Wang, Suhang Zheng, Tianyu Li, Hongwei Feng, Yanghua Xiao. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025. Zhouhong Gu, Xingzhou Chen, Xiaoran Shi, Suhang Zheng, Tianyu Li 0007, Hongwei Feng, Yanghua Xiao |
ACL (1) | 2 |
| 2025 | StrucText-Eval: Evaluating Large Language Model's Reasoning Ability in Structure-Rich TextabstractThe effective utilization of structured data, integral to corporate data strategies, has been challenged by the rise of large language models (LLMs) capable of processing unstructured information.This shift prompts the question: can LLMs interpret structured data directly in its unstructured form?We propose an automatic evaluation data generation method for assessing LLMs' reasoning capabilities on structurerich text to explore this.Our approach supports 8 structured languages and 29 tasks, generating data with adjustable complexity through controllable nesting and structural width.We introduce StrucText-Eval, a benchmark containing 5,800 pre-generated and annotated samples designed to evaluate how well LLMs understand and reason through structured text.StrucText-Eval is divided into two suites: a regular Test suite (3,712 samples) and a Test-Hard suite (2,088 samples), the latter emphasizing the gap between human and model performance on more complex tasks.Experimental results show that while open-source LLMs achieve a maximum accuracy of 74.9% on the standard dataset, their performance drops significantly to 45.8% on the harder dataset.In contrast, human participants reach an accuracy of 92.6% on StrucText-Eval-Hard, highlighting LLMs' current limitations in handling intricate structural information.The benchmark and generation codes are open sourced in https://github.com/MikeGu721/ StrucText-Eval Zhouhong Gu, Haoning Ye, Xingzhou Chen, Hongwei Feng, Yanghua Xiao |
ACL (1) | 3 |