Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Xinyang Lu
dblp:266/9228
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 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
2 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 53% Language models and text generation · 26% Learning theory · 13% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Data mining · 100% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › calibration
confidence calibration |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs · ICLR 2024 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
uncertainty estimation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › statistical estimation › minimax estimation
minimax rates |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | DBSCAN: Optimal Rates For Density-Based Cluster Estimation · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019 |
Data mining
clustering |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | DBSCAN: Optimal Rates For Density-Based Cluster Estimation · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019 |
Data mining › clustering › hierarchical clustering
cluster tree estimation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | DBSCAN: Optimal Rates For Density-Based Cluster Estimation · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019 |
Data mining › clustering › density-based clustering
DBSCAN |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | DBSCAN: Optimal Rates For Density-Based Cluster Estimation · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019 |
Data mining › clustering
density-based clustering |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | DBSCAN: Optimal Rates For Density-Based Cluster Estimation · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
sampling · 0.8random geometric graphs · 0.8prompting · 0.8minimax analysis · 0.8kernel density estimation · 0.8black-box confidence elicitation · 0.8aggregation · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMsabstractEmpowering large language models (LLMs) to accurately express confidence in their answers is essential for reliable and trustworthy decision-making. Previous confidence elicitation methods, which primarily rely on *white-box access* to internal model information or model fine-tuning, have become less suitable for LLMs, especially closed-source commercial APIs. This leads to a growing need to explore the untapped area of *black-box* approaches for LLM uncertainty estimation. To better break down the problem, we define a systematic framework with three components: *prompting* strategies for eliciting verbalized confidence, *sampling* methods for generating multiple responses, and *aggregation* techniques for computing consistency. We then benchmark these methods on two key tasks—confidence calibration and failure prediction—across five types of datasets (e.g., commonsense and arithmetic reasoning) and five widely-used LLMs including GPT-4 and LLaMA 2 Chat. Our analysis uncovers several key insights: 1) LLMs, when verbalizing their confidence, tend to be *overconfident*, potentially imitating human patterns of expressing confidence. 2) As model capability scales up, both calibration and failure prediction performance improve, yet still far from ideal performance.
3) Employing our proposed strategies, such as human-inspired prompts, consistency among multiple responses, and better aggregation strategies can help mitigate this overconfidence from various perspectives.
4) Comparisons with white-box methods indicate that while white-box methods perform better, the gap is narrow, e.g., 0.522 to 0.605 in AUROC. Despite these advancements, none of these techniques consistently outperform others, and all investigated methods struggle in challenging tasks, such as those requiring professional knowledge, indicating significant scope for improvement. We believe this study can serve as a strong baseline and provide insights for eliciting confidence in black-box LLMs. The code is publicly available at https://github.com/MiaoXiong2320/llm-uncertainty. Miao Xiong, Xinyang Lu, Jie Fu 0001, Junxian He, Bryan Hooi |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2019 | DBSCAN: Optimal Rates For Density-Based Cluster EstimationabstractWe study the problem of optimal estimation of the density cluster tree under various smoothness assumptions on the underlying density. Inspired by the seminal work of Chaudhuri et al. (2014), we formulate a new notion of clustering consistency which is better suited to smooth densities, and derive minimax rates for cluster tree estimation under Hölder smooth densities of arbitrary degree. We present a computationally efficient, rate optimal cluster tree estimator based on simple extensions of the popular DBSCAN algorithm of Ester et al. (1996). Our procedure relies on kernel density estimators and returns a sequence of nested random geometric graphs whose connected components form a hierarchy of clusters. The resulting optimal rates for cluster tree estimation depend on the degree of smoothness of the underlying density and, interestingly, match the minimax rates for density estimation under the sup-norm loss. Our results complement and extend the analysis of the DBSCAN algorithm in Sriperumbudur and Steinwart (2012). Finally, we consider level set estimation and cluster consistency for densities with jump discontinuities. We demonstrate that the DBSCAN algorithm attains the minimax rate in terms of the jump size and sample size in this setting as well. Daren Wang, Xinyang Lu, Alessandro Rinaldo |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 2 |