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

Daksh Dobhal

dblp:372/7215 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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

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

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computing education · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Language models and text generation · 77% Machine translation · 23%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-robot interaction · 100%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Logic in computer science · 100%

Topics — the 4 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
0.912025
Autonomous Evaluation of LLMs for Truth Maintenance and Reasoning Tasks · ICLR 2025
Computing education › robotics education
educational robotics platform
0.912025
Using Explainable AI and Hierarchical Planning for Outreach with Robots · AAAI 2025
Computing education
robotics education
0.912025
Using Explainable AI and Hierarchical Planning for Outreach with Robots · AAAI 2025
Logic in computer science › nonmonotonic reasoning
truth maintenance systems
0.912025
Autonomous Evaluation of LLMs for Truth Maintenance and Reasoning Tasks · ICLR 2025

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

randomized dataset generation · 1.7hierarchical planning · 1.7explainable AI · 1.7auto-generated benchmark · 1.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Using Explainable AI and Hierarchical Planning for Outreach with Robots
abstract
Understanding how robots plan and execute tasks is crucial in today's world, where they are becoming more prevalent in our daily lives. However, teaching non-experts, such as K-12 students, the complexities of robot planning can be challenging. This work presents an open-source platform, JEDAI.Ed, that simplifies the process using a visual interface that abstracts the details of various planning processes that robots use for performing complex mobile manipulation tasks. Using principles developed in the field of explainable AI, this intuitive platform enables students to use a high-level intuitive instruction set to perform complex tasks, visualize them on an in-built simulator, and to obtain helpful hints and natural language explanations for errors. Finally, JEDAI.Ed, includes an adaptive curriculum generation method that provides students with customized learning ramps. This platform's efficacy was tested through a user study with university students who had little to no computer science background. Our results show that JEDAI.Ed is highly effective in increasing student engagement, teaching robotics programming, and decreasing the time need to solve tasks as compared to baselines.
Rushang Karia, Jayesh Nagpal, Daksh Dobhal, Pulkit Verma 0001, Rashmeet Kaur Nayyar, Naman Shah 0002, Siddharth Srivastava 0001
AAAI3
2025 Autonomous Evaluation of LLMs for Truth Maintenance and Reasoning Tasks
abstract
This paper presents AutoEval, a novel benchmark for scaling Large Language Model (LLM) assessment in formal tasks with clear notions of correctness, such as truth maintenance in translation and logical reasoning. AutoEval is the first benchmarking paradigm that offers several key advantages necessary for scaling objective evaluation of LLMs without human labeling: (a) ability to evaluate LLMs of increasing sophistication by auto-generating tasks at different levels of difficulty; (b) auto-generation of ground truth that eliminates dependence on expensive and time-consuming human annotation; (c) the use of automatically generated, randomized datasets that mitigate the ability of successive LLMs to overfit to static datasets used in many contemporary benchmarks. Empirical analysis shows that an LLM's performance on AutoEval is highly indicative of its performance on a diverse array of other benchmarks focusing on translation and reasoning tasks, making it a valuable autonomous evaluation paradigm in settings where hand-curated datasets can be hard to obtain and/or update.
Rushang Karia, Daniel Bramblett, Daksh Dobhal, Siddharth Srivastava 0001
ICLR3