Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Andong Hua
dblp:364/0101
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-author · 3 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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.
| Artificial intelligence
3 papers |
Language models and text generation · 53% Trustworthy machine learning · 25% Transfer learning and domain adaptation · 11% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Medical and health informatics · 100% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 10, 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 |
1.7 | 2 | 2025 | NutriBench: A Dataset for Evaluating Large Language Models in Nutrition Estimation from Meal Descriptions · ICLR 2025 Flaw or Artifact? Rethinking Prompt Sensitivity in Evaluating LLMs · EMNLP 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model evaluation
LLM-as-a-judge |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Flaw or Artifact? Rethinking Prompt Sensitivity in Evaluating LLMs · EMNLP 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › prompting
prompt sensitivity |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Flaw or Artifact? Rethinking Prompt Sensitivity in Evaluating LLMs · EMNLP 2025 |
Medical and health informatics
nutrition estimation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | NutriBench: A Dataset for Evaluating Large Language Models in Nutrition Estimation from Meal Descriptions · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness › adversarial robustness › adversarial training
adversarial fine-tuning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Initialization Matters for Adversarial Transfer Learning · CVPR 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
adversarial robustness |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Initialization Matters for Adversarial Transfer Learning · CVPR 2024 |
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
adversarial transfer learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Initialization Matters for Adversarial Transfer Learning · CVPR 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
parameter-efficient fine-tuning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Initialization Matters for Adversarial Transfer Learning · CVPR 2024 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
retrieval-augmented generation |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | NutriBench: A Dataset for Evaluating Large Language Models in Nutrition Estimation from Meal Descriptions · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Flaw or Artifact? Rethinking Prompt Sensitivity in Evaluating LLMs · EMNLP 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
retrieval-augmented generation · 1.7chain-of-thought prompting · 1.7log-likelihood scoring · 0.9LLM-as-a-judge · 0.9linear probing · 0.8adversarial training · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Flaw or Artifact? Rethinking Prompt Sensitivity in Evaluating LLMsabstractPrompt sensitivity, referring to the phenomenon where paraphrasing (i.e., repeating something written or spoken using different words) leads to significant changes in large language model (LLM) performance, has been widely accepted as a core limitation of LLMs.In this work, we revisit this issue and ask: Is the widely reported high prompt sensitivity truly an inherent weakness of LLMs, or is it largely an artifact of evaluation processes?To answer this question, we systematically evaluate 7 LLMs (e.g., GPT and Gemini family) across 6 benchmarks, including both multiple-choice and open-ended tasks on 12 diverse prompt templates.We find that much of the prompt sensitivity stems from heuristic evaluation methods, including log-likelihood scoring and rigid answer matching, which often overlook semantically correct responses expressed through alternative phrasings, such as synonyms or paraphrases.When we adopt LLM-as-a-Judge evaluations, we observe a substantial reduction in performance variance and a consistently higher correlation in model rankings across prompts.Our findings suggest that modern LLMs are more robust to prompt templates than previously believed, and that prompt sensitivity may be more an artifact of evaluation than a flaw in the models. Andong Hua, Kenan Tang, Chenhe Gu, Jindong Gu, Eric Wong 0001, Yao Qin 0001 |
EMNLP | 1 |
| 2025 | NutriBench: A Dataset for Evaluating Large Language Models in Nutrition Estimation from Meal DescriptionsabstractAccurate nutrition estimation helps people make informed dietary choices and is essential in the prevention of serious health complications. We present NutriBench, the first publicly available natural language meal description nutrition benchmark. NutriBench consists of 11,857 meal descriptions generated from real-world global dietary intake data. The data is human-verified and annotated with macro-nutrient labels, including carbohydrates, proteins, fats, and calories. We conduct an extensive evaluation of Nutribench on the task of carbohydrate estimation, testing twelve leading Large Language Models (LLMs), including GPT-4o, Llama3.1, Qwen2, Gemma2, and OpenBioLLM models, using standard, Chain-of-Thought and Retrieval-Augmented Generation strategies. Additionally, we present a study involving professional nutritionists, finding that LLMs can provide comparable but significantly faster estimates. Finally, we perform a real-world risk assessment by simulating the effect of carbohydrate predictions on the blood glucose levels of individuals with type 1 diabetes. Our work highlights the opportunities and challenges of using LLMs for nutrition estimation, demonstrating their potential to aid professionals and laypersons and improve health outcomes. Our benchmark is publicly available at: https://mehak126.github.io/nutribench.html Mehak Preet Dhaliwal, Andong Hua, Laya Pullela, Ryan Burke, Yao Qin 0001 |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2024 | Initialization Matters for Adversarial Transfer LearningabstractWith the prevalence of the Pretraining-Finetuning paradigm in transfer learning, the robustness of down-stream tasks has become a critical concern. In this work, we delve into adversarial robustness in transfer learning and reveal the critical role of initialization, including both the pretrained model and the linear head. First, we discover the necessity of an adversarially robust pre-trained model. Specifically, we reveal that with a standard pretrained model, Parameter-Efficient Finetuning (PEFT) methods either fail to be adversarially robust or continue to exhibit significantly degraded adversarial robustness on downstream tasks, even with adversarial training during finetuning. Leveraging a robust pretrained model, surprisingly, we observe that a simple linear probing can outper-form full finetuning and other PEFT methods with random initialization on certain datasets. We further identify that linear probing excels in preserving robustness from the robust pretraining. Based on this, we propose Robust Linear Initialization (RoLl) for adversarial finetuning, which initializes the linear head with the weights obtained by ad-versarial linear probing to maximally inherit the robust-ness from pretraining. Across five different image classification datasets, we demonstrate the effectiveness of RoLI and achieve new state-of-the-art results. Our code is available at https://github.com/DongXzz/RoLI. Andong Hua, Jindong Gu, Zhiyu Xue, Nicholas Carlini, Eric Wong 0001, Yao Qin 0001 |
CVPR | 1 |