Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Dong Zhao 0012
dblp:63/550-12
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0002-5534-122XORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 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
1 paper |
Language models and text generation · 67% Information extraction and text analysis · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › in-context learning
demonstration selection |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Reflect Then Learn: Active Prompting for Information Extraction Guided by Introspective Confusion · AAAI 2026 |
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › low-resource NLP › low-resource information extraction
few-shot information extraction |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Reflect Then Learn: Active Prompting for Information Extraction Guided by Introspective Confusion · AAAI 2026 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
in-context learning |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Reflect Then Learn: Active Prompting for Information Extraction Guided by Introspective Confusion · AAAI 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
uncertainty quantification · 1.0large language model · 1.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Reflect Then Learn: Active Prompting for Information Extraction Guided by Introspective ConfusionabstractLarge Language Models (LLMs) show remarkable potential for few-shot information extraction (IE), yet their performance is highly sensitive to the choice of in-context examples. Conventional selection strategies often fail to provide informative guidance, as they overlook a key source of model fallibility: confusion stemming not just from semantic content, but also from the generation of well-structured formats required by IE tasks. To address this, we introduce Active Prompting for Information Extraction (APIE), a novel active prompting framework guided by a principle we term introspective confusion. Our method empowers an LLM to assess its own confusion through a dual-component uncertainty metric that uniquely quantifies both Format Uncertainty (difficulty in generating correct syntax) and Content Uncertainty (inconsistency in extracted semantics). By ranking unlabeled data with this comprehensive score, our framework actively selects the most challenging and informative samples to serve as few-shot exemplars. Extensive experiments on four benchmarks show that our approach consistently outperforms strong baselines, yielding significant improvements in both extraction accuracy and robustness. Our work highlights the critical importance of a fine-grained, dual-level view of model uncertainty when it comes to building effective and reliable structured generation systems. Dong Zhao 0012, Xiang Chen 0016, Chuanxing Geng, Shengzhong Zhang, Shaoyuan Li, Sheng-Jun Huang |
AAAI | 1 |