Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Shujun Cao
dblp:421/7183
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 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 |
Trustworthy machine learning · 67% Vision and language · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Looking Beyond the One: Operationalizing and Eliciting Visual Ambiguity in VLLMs · ACL (1) 2026 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
representation probing |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Looking Beyond the One: Operationalizing and Eliciting Visual Ambiguity in VLLMs · ACL (1) 2026 |
Computer vision › Vision and language
visual question answering |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Looking Beyond the One: Operationalizing and Eliciting Visual Ambiguity in VLLMs · ACL (1) 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
multi-focus decoding · 1.0hidden state probing · 1.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Looking Beyond the One: Operationalizing and Eliciting Visual Ambiguity in VLLMsabstractVisual questions are often ambiguous: the same image-question pair may admit multiple valid answers depending on which region is referenced.However, current Visual Question Answering (VQA) systems typically collapse this ambiguity, committing to a single interpretation during decoding and evaluation.In this work, we study visual question ambiguity from a grounded, region-centric perspective.We operationalize ambiguity as the existence of multiple distinct answer-supporting regions in an image, each independently yielding a valid answer.This formulation makes ambiguity observable without requiring exhaustive multi-answer annotations.Based on this definition, we conduct a systematic empirical study of state-of-the-art Visual Large Language Models (VLLMs).We find that, under default decoding, VLLMs consistently under-report ambiguity-even when multiple valid visual groundings are present.Importantly, probing model hidden states reveals that ambiguity-related signals are already encoded in their internal representations, despite not being reliably expressed in outputs.Finally, we show that selectively activating multi-focus answering based on these signals can recover additional valid answers while avoiding excessive hallucination.Together, our results suggest that ambiguity in VQA is not merely an annotation artifact or capability limitation, but a property that VLLMs internally recognize yet often fail to surface under standard decoding assumptions. Yuchong Chen, Bowei Zou, Yifan Fan, Shujun Cao, Yu Hong 0001 |
ACL (1) | 6 |
| 2026 | MFHS: Mutual consistency learning-based foundation model integrates hypergraph for semi-supervised medical image segmentation
Zhaichao Tang, Yonghao Wu, Ruixiang Zhai, Xuanhe Dong, Zikang Du, Shujun Cao |
Pattern Recognit. | 7 |