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

Qiming Ge

dblp:359/3606 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
alignment
1.622025
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
1.622025
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
0.912025
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
0.912025
Pre-Trained Policy Discriminators are General Reward Models · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
scaling laws
0.912025
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
0.812024
Navigating the OverKill in Large Language Models · ACL (1) 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.812024
Navigating the OverKill in Large Language Models · ACL (1) 2024
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy optimization
0.312025
Pre-Trained Policy Discriminators are General Reward Models · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reinforcement learning for NLP
reinforcement fine-tuning
0.312025
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Capability Salience Vector: Fine-grained Alignment of Loss and Capabilities for Downstream Task Scaling Law
abstract
Scaling 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 Models
abstract
We 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
NeurIPS8
2024 Navigating the OverKill in Large Language Models
abstract
Chenyu 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 Feedback
abstract
The 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
ICML2