Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Qiming Ge
dblp:359/3606
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 1 first-author · 4 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
4 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 37% Language models and text generation · 32% Deep learning architectures and training · 11% |
Topics — the 9 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
alignment |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Pre-Trained Policy Discriminators are General Reward Models · NeurIPS 2025 Linear Alignment: A Closed-form Solution for Aligning Human Preferences without Tuning and Feedback · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reinforcement learning from human feedback |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Pre-Trained Policy Discriminators are General Reward Models · NeurIPS 2025 Linear Alignment: A Closed-form Solution for Aligning Human Preferences without Tuning and Feedback · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
downstream task performance prediction |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Capability Salience Vector: Fine-grained Alignment of Loss and Capabilities for Downstream Task Scaling Law · ACL (1) 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reward learning
reward modeling |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Pre-Trained Policy Discriminators are General Reward Models · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
scaling laws |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Capability Salience Vector: Fine-grained Alignment of Loss and Capabilities for Downstream Task Scaling Law · ACL (1) 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model
large language model behavior |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Navigating the OverKill in Large Language Models · ACL (1) 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Navigating the OverKill in Large Language Models · ACL (1) 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy optimization |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Pre-Trained Policy Discriminators are General Reward Models · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reinforcement learning for NLP
reinforcement fine-tuning |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Pre-Trained Policy Discriminators are General Reward Models · NeurIPS 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
scaling law analysis · 0.9pre-training · 0.9policy discriminator · 0.9loss decomposition · 0.9capability salience vector · 0.9robustness analysis · 0.8large language model · 0.8divergence-constrained policy optimization · 0.8closed-form policy optimization · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Capability Salience Vector: Fine-grained Alignment of Loss and Capabilities for Downstream Task Scaling LawabstractScaling law builds the relationship between training computation and validation loss, enabling researchers to effectively predict the loss trending of models across different levels of computation. However, a gap still remains between validation loss and the model’s downstream capabilities, making it untrivial to apply scaling law to direct performance prediction for downstream tasks. The loss typically represents a cumulative penalty for predicted tokens, which are implicitly considered to have equal importance. Nevertheless, our studies have shown evidence that when considering different training data distributions, we cannot directly model the relationship between downstream capability and computation or token loss. To bridge the gap between validation loss and downstream task capabilities, in this work, we introduce Capability Salience Vector, which decomposes the overall loss and assigns different importance weights to tokens to assess a specific meta-capability, aligning the validation loss with downstream task performance in terms of the model’s capabilities. Experiments on various popular benchmarks demonstrate that our proposed Capability Salience Vector could significantly improve the predictability of language model performance on downstream tasks. Qiming Ge, Shuhao Xing, Songyang Gao, Yunhua Zhou, Yicheng Zou, Songyang Zhang 0001, Zhi Chen 0006, Hang Yan 0001, Qi Zhang 0001, Qipeng Guo, Kai Chen 0026 |
ACL (1) | 1 |
| 2025 | Pre-Trained Policy Discriminators are General Reward ModelsabstractWe offer a novel perspective on reward modeling by formulating it as a policy discriminator, which quantifies the difference between two policies to generate a reward signal, guiding the training policy towards a target policy with desired behaviors. Based on this conceptual insight, we propose a scalable pre-training method named POLicy DiscriminAtive LeaRning (POLAR), which trains a reward model (RM) to discern identical policies and discriminate different ones. Unlike traditional reward modeling methods relying on absolute preferences, POLAR captures the relative difference between one policy and an arbitrary target policy, which is a scalable, high-level optimization objective suitable for modeling generic ranking relationships. Leveraging the POLAR pre-training paradigm, we present a series of RMs with parameter scales from 1.8B to 7B. Empirical results show that POLAR substantially outperforms traditional non-pre-trained methods, significantly enhancing RM performance.
For instance, POLAR-7B could improve preference accuracy from 54.8% to 81.0% on STEM tasks and from 57.9% to 85.5% on creative writing tasks compared to SOTA baselines.
POLAR also shows robust generalization capabilities in RLHF using Reinforcement Fine-tuning (RFT), providing reliable reward signals and markedly enhancing policy performance—improving LLaMa3.1-8B from an average of 47.36% to 56.33% and Qwen2.5-32B from 64.49% to 70.47% on 20 benchmarks.
Moreover, scaling experiments reveal a clear power-law relationship between computation and performance, supported by linear correlation coefficients approaching 0.99.
The impressive performance, strong generalization, and scaling properties suggest that POLAR is a promising direction for developing general and strong reward models. Shihan Dou, Shichun Liu, Yuming Yang 0001, Yicheng Zou, Yunhua Zhou, Shuhao Xing, Chenhao Huang, Qiming Ge, Haijun Lv, Demin Song, Songyang Gao, Chengqi Lyu, Enyu Zhou, Honglin Guo, Zhiheng Xi, Qipeng Guo, Tao Gui, Qi Zhang 0001, Xipeng Qiu, Xuanjing Huang 0001, Kai Chen 0026 |
NeurIPS | 8 |
| 2024 | Navigating the OverKill in Large Language ModelsabstractChenyu Shi, Xiao Wang, Qiming Ge, Songyang Gao, Xianjun Yang, Tao Gui, Qi Zhang, Xuanjing Huang, Xun Zhao, Dahua Lin. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2024. Chenyu Shi, Xiao Wang 0042, Qiming Ge, Songyang Gao, Xianjun Yang, Tao Gui, Qi Zhang 0001, Xuanjing Huang 0001, Dahua Lin |
ACL (1) | 3 |
| 2024 | Linear Alignment: A Closed-form Solution for Aligning Human Preferences without Tuning and FeedbackabstractThe success of AI assistants based on Language Models (LLMs) hinges on Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) to comprehend and align with user intentions. However, traditional alignment algorithms, such as PPO, are hampered by complex annotation and training requirements. This reliance limits the applicability of RLHF and hinders the development of professional assistants tailored to diverse human preferences. In this work, we introduce Linear Alignment, a novel algorithm that aligns language models with human preferences in one single inference step, eliminating the reliance on data annotation and model training. Linear alignment incorporates a new parameterization for policy optimization under divergence constraints, which enables the extraction of optimal policy in a closed-form manner and facilitates the direct estimation of the aligned response. Extensive experiments on both general and personalized preference datasets demonstrate that linear alignment significantly enhances the performance and efficiency of LLM alignment across diverse scenarios. Songyang Gao, Qiming Ge, Shihan Dou, Junjie Ye 0005, Xiao Wang 0001, Yicheng Zou, Zhi Chen 0006, Hang Yan 0001, Qi Zhang 0001, Dahua Lin |
ICML | 2 |