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

Xingzhou Chen

dblp:349/8852 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation
0.912025
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
0.912025
GAPO: Learning Preferential Prompt through Generative Adversarial Policy Optimization · ACL (1) 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
alignment
0.312025
GAPO: Learning Preferential Prompt through Generative Adversarial Policy Optimization · ACL (1) 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
preference optimization
0.312025
GAPO: Learning Preferential Prompt through Generative Adversarial Policy Optimization · ACL (1) 2025
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
structured data understanding
0.312025
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 The "Knowledge-Behavior Gap" in Cultural Taboo Safety of Large Language Models
abstract
Ying 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 Optimization
abstract
Zhouhong 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 Text
abstract
The 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