Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 7 cited by

User Behavior Analysis in Privacy Protection with Large Language Models: A Study on Privacy Preferences with Limited Data

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that few-shot large language models can model user privacy preferences accurately even when privacy-related data is scarce, and that differential privacy and federated learning reduce exposure risk.

desk verdict The paper's central claim—that LLMs improve privacy preference modeling with limited data—is never tested; the experiments only compare classical classifiers, so the abstract overstates the findings. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.06305 v1 pith:G6RUWZEV submitted 2025-05-08 cs.CR cs.AI

Haowei Yang , Qingyi Lu , Yang Wang , Sibei Liu , Jiayun Zheng , Ao Xiang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CRcs.AI
keywords largelanguagemodelsprivacyprotectionuserbehavioranalysisfew-shotlearningpreferencemodelingdifferentialfederatedQ-learning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that large language models can model users' privacy preferences even when only a small amount of privacy-related data is available, and that combining differential privacy and federated learning can reduce the exposure risk of doing so. The setting matters because privacy preference data is inherently scarce: users hesitate to share it and regulations restrict collection. The paper proposes a few-shot, privacy-computing-aware framework and reports comparisons on survey, app-permission, public-policy, and GAN-simulated datasets. The experiments it presents evaluate Naive Bayes, an MLP, and Q-learning rather than an LLM, so the LLM-specific improvement is a stated claim and an extrapolation rather than a directly measured result.

What carries the argument

The machinery that carries the reported results is a three-model prediction pipeline: a Naive Bayes classifier computing $P(Y\mid X)=\frac{P(X\mid Y)P(Y)}{P(X)}$ over privacy-setting features; a multilayer perceptron with ReLU hidden layers, softmax output, and cross-entropy loss; and Q-learning with the update $Q(S_t,A_t)\leftarrow Q(S_t,A_t)+\alpha[R_t+\gamma\max_a Q(S_{t+1},a)-Q(S_t,A_t)]$ for adapting privacy decisions from user feedback. The paper frames this pipeline as the substrate for an LLM-based few-shot framework combined with differential privacy and federated learning, but that LLM layer is not what produced the reported accuracy figures.

What would settle it

Run a few-shot LLM on the same 1,000-record User Privacy Survey split used for the paper's small-data experiment, with the same 80/10/10 partition and features, and check whether it beats the reported 76.5% Naive Bayes accuracy; the paper itself does not report such an LLM evaluation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that few-shot learning plus privacy-computing techniques lets large language models model user privacy preferences accurately even when privacy-related data is scarce, and that adding differential privacy and federated learning further lowers the risk of exposing user data. In support, the paper reports accuracy comparisons on survey, app-permission, public-policy, and GAN-simulated data: rule-based reaches 72.3%, Naive Bayes 79.1%, MLP 85.2%, and Q-learning 87.5%, with Naive Bayes holding 76.5% at 1,000 records and Q-learning reaching 90.5% beyond 10,000 records. The paper interprets these results as showing that learned, adaptive models can optimize privacy preferences in data-limited environments.

Load-bearing premise

The reported accuracies rest on the untested premise that the GAN-simulated and survey data faithfully represent real user privacy choices, and the LLM-specific improvement is a further assumption because the results evaluate only Naive Bayes, an MLP, and Q-learning.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, privacy-aware apps could offer adaptive settings after observing only a few thousand user decisions instead of requiring large-scale behavior logs.
  • Naive Bayes' 76.5% accuracy at 1,000 records implies that simple probabilistic models are a sensible default in data-poor privacy settings.
  • The reported Q-learning reward growth over episodes suggests dynamic privacy settings can be tuned from user feedback, making one-size-fits-all privacy rules replaceable.
  • If differential privacy and federated learning preserve the reported accuracies, privacy preference models could be trained and served without centralizing raw user data.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Section IV reports no evaluation of an LLM; the abstract's strongest claim is therefore a projection from classical-model results rather than a measured outcome.
  • Because 10,000 of the 50,000 records are GAN-simulated and no real-world validation is reported, the absolute accuracy figures are plausibly upper bounds for real deployments.
  • A natural next experiment is to measure accuracy as a function of the differential-privacy budget $\varepsilon$ on a fixed dataset; the paper's framework implies the drop is small, but no such curve is reported.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims to study user privacy preference modeling with large language models (LLMs) in data-limited environments, proposing a framework that integrates few-shot learning and privacy-computing techniques such as Differential Privacy (DP) and Federated Learning (FL). It describes multiple datasets, including a GAN-based simulated dataset, and reports experiments comparing Naive Bayes, MLP, and Q-learning against a rule-based baseline. The abstract and conclusion assert that LLMs significantly improve privacy preference modeling accuracy with limited data and that DP/FL further reduce exposure risk. However, the experimental section contains no LLM at all, and the DP/FL claims are not evaluated experimentally.

Significance. If the central claim were established, the paper could contribute to privacy preference modeling in low-data regimes, a practically relevant problem. The manuscript, however, does not deliver evidence for that claim: no LLM is instantiated or evaluated, no code or data are provided, no variance or significance testing is reported, and the synthetic data source is unvalidated. The proposed PDSS framework is described but never used in the experiments. The paper ships no machine-checked proofs, reproducible code, or falsifiable predictions, so its current significance is limited to a proposal of an unevaluated framework.

major comments (5)
  1. [Abstract; §III-C; §IV-A–B] The central claim that LLMs significantly improve privacy preference modeling accuracy is never tested. Section III-C defines the comparative methods as Naive Bayes, MLP, Q-learning, and rule-based methods, and Sections IV-A and IV-B report accuracy only for those methods. No LLM is instantiated, fine-tuned, prompted, or otherwise evaluated anywhere in the results, so the abstract's headline conclusion is unsupported by the experiments.
  2. [§III-A; Table I] The Simulated Privacy dataset generated by GANs is used as a source for the reported classification results, but the manuscript provides no validation that this synthetic data is representative of real user privacy preferences. Table I lists the dataset as 'GAN-based synthetic data' but gives no comparison with the distribution of genuine user choices; all accuracy numbers depend on this unvalidated surrogate, so the external validity of the conclusions is not established.
  3. [§IV-A–B; §III-C] Reported accuracies are point estimates without variance, confidence intervals, or significance tests. Section III-C states that 5-fold cross-validation is applied and that Accuracy, Recall, and F1-score are the evaluation metrics, but Figures 3–4 and the text report only single accuracy numbers (72.3%, 79.1%, 85.2%, 88.1%, 90.5%) and one F1-score (86.3%); no error bars, standard deviations, or significance tests are provided, so the observed differences between methods cannot be interpreted.
  4. [Abstract; §V; §III-A] The claim that incorporating Differential Privacy and Federated Learning further reduces the risk of user data exposure is not evaluated. Differential Privacy appears only as a preprocessing step in Section III-A, and Federated Learning is mentioned in Section V as a future direction; no experiment involving DP or FL, no privacy budget, and no leakage or utility metric is reported.
  5. [§III-B; §IV-B] The 'limited data' and 'few-shot learning' framing is not supported by the experiments. Dataset sizes of 1,000 to 20,000 records are used with an 80/10/10 split, and no few-shot episodes, k-shot tasks, or meta-learning procedure is described. The paper therefore does not actually test few-shot learning despite the title and abstract.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figures 3–5] The figure placeholders in the submitted text do not display the actual plots; the final version must include figures with labeled axes, legends, and error bars to support the reported accuracy comparisons.
  2. [§III-B] The equation display in Section III-B is corrupted, with '?' characters replacing mathematical symbols in Formulas 1–6; this makes the modeling section difficult to read.
  3. [References] The reference list contains many citations whose connection to privacy preference modeling is unclear, such as video editing [2], music composition [5], optical network resource assignment [9], and financial sentiment analysis [28]; these should be replaced with directly relevant work or justified in the text.
  4. [§III-C; §IV] Section III-C lists Recall and F1-score as evaluation metrics, but Sections IV-A and IV-B report only accuracy and one F1-score; the other metrics should be reported or their omission should be explained.
  5. [Table I] Table I states that Public Privacy DS is intended to 'Train LLMs for privacy inference,' but no LLM training configuration, prompt design, model choice, or related experiment appears anywhere in the paper; this discrepancy should be resolved.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the central LLM claim is unsupported by the reported experiments, but that is a correctness gap, not a circular derivation.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain is not circular. The paper proposes an LLM-based privacy preference modeling framework, but the experiments in Sections IV-A and IV-B evaluate only a rule-based baseline, Naive Bayes, MLP, and Q-learning; no accuracy number is reported for an LLM. That gap makes the abstract's central claim unsupported by the reported evidence, but unsupportedness is not circularity: no result is derived from premises that already contain it. The Simulated Privacy GAN dataset is an input used for training and evaluation; the paper never treats the GAN-generated labels as an independent prediction to be validated, so no fit is renamed as a prediction. The self-citations (e.g., references [16]-[19] and [23]) are incidental background citations and do not carry any load-bearing uniqueness or ansatz claim. There is no equation in which an output equals an input by construction, no fitted parameter relabeled as a forecast, and no imported self-cited theorem forcing the conclusion. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim depends on the validity of three private datasets and a GAN-simulated dataset, plus fitted MLP and Q-learning parameters, while the LLM component is never specified. The invented PDSS framework appears only in the introduction and has no evidential support.

free parameters (4)
  • MLP weight matrices and biases (W1-W3, b1-b3) = not reported
    Trained via cross-entropy loss in Formula 5; the central accuracy claims depend on these fitted parameters.
  • Q-learning learning rate alpha and discount factor gamma = not reported
    Chosen by hand for Formula 6; affect cumulative reward and final accuracy.
  • KNN imputation neighbor count k = not reported
    Used in preprocessing in Section III-A without a specified value.
  • Differential privacy noise scale = not reported
    Mentioned as applied to sensitive data in Section III-A, but no epsilon or delta values are given.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Privacy preferences are discrete categorical outcomes that can be predicted from feature vector X.
    Used throughout Section III-B; the framing assumes these categories are learnable from behavioral data.
  • ad hoc to paper The GAN-simulated privacy data is statistically representative of real user preferences.
    Section III-A uses 10,000 synthetic records to balance data and enhance generalization, but no validation against real distributions is provided.
  • standard math Bayes theorem with the naive conditional independence assumption is applicable to privacy preference prediction.
    Formula 1 in Section III-B.
  • domain assumption The reported datasets (User Privacy Survey, App Permission Logs, Public Privacy DS) are accurate and representative.
    Table 1 describes them but gives no collection methodology or bias analysis.
invented entities (1)
  • Privacy-Driven Secure Synthesis (PDSS) Framework
    purpose: Introduced as a novel privacy-aware inference framework in Related Work and Figure 1; combines prompt encoding, perturbed inference, and small LM training.
    No implementation, experiments, or external validation are provided, and the paper's own experiments do not use PDSS.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of User Behavior Analysis in Privacy Protection with Large Language Models: A Study on Privacy Preferences with Limited Data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G6RUWZEV

@misc{pith2026250506305,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: User Behavior Analysis in Privacy Protection with Large Language Models: A Study on Privacy Preferences with Limited Data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G6RUWZEV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.06305}
}
read the original abstract

With the widespread application of large language models (LLMs), user privacy protection has become a significant research topic. Existing privacy preference modeling methods often rely on large-scale user data, making effective privacy preference analysis challenging in data-limited environments. This study explores how LLMs can analyze user behavior related to privacy protection in scenarios with limited data and proposes a method that integrates Few-shot Learning and Privacy Computing to model user privacy preferences. The research utilizes anonymized user privacy settings data, survey responses, and simulated data, comparing the performance of traditional modeling approaches with LLM-based methods. Experimental results demonstrate that, even with limited data, LLMs significantly improve the accuracy of privacy preference modeling. Additionally, incorporating Differential Privacy and Federated Learning further reduces the risk of user data exposure. The findings provide new insights into the application of LLMs in privacy protection and offer theoretical support for advancing privacy computing and user behavior analysis.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 7 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Multimodal Foundation Model-Driven User Interest Modeling and Behavior Analysis on Short Video Platforms

    cs.IR 2025-09 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A standard attention-fusion plus Transformer sequence model is applied to short-video recommendation, with claimed gains over weak baselines and no reproducible artifacts.

  2. Meta-Learning for Cold-Start Personalization in Prompt-Tuned LLMs

    cs.LG 2025-07 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A meta-learned prompt-tuning method for cold-start LLM recommendations reports better Hit@10 and nDCG@10 on MovieLens-1M, but with no code, no error bars, and no shown results for Amazon or Recbole.

  3. Research on Low-Latency Inference and Training Efficiency Optimization for Graph Neural Network and Large Language Model-Based Recommendation Systems

    cs.LG 2025-06 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A hybrid GNN-LLM recommender with FPGA, DeepSpeed, and LoRA reportedly reaches NDCG@10 of 0.75 at 40-60ms latency while cutting training time by 66%, but the supporting artifacts are absent.

  4. LLM-Augmented Symptom Analysis for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction: A Clinical NLP

    cs.CL 2025-07 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A small synthetic study reports that Bio_ClinicalBERT embeddings with Random Forest classify CVD risk in about 20 hand-written symptom texts, but the claims of MIMIC-III and CARDIO-NLP evaluation are unsupported.

  5. Research on Model Parallelism and Data Parallelism Optimization Methods in Large Language Model-Based Recommendation Systems

    cs.DC 2025-06 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A hybrid model-plus-data parallel scheme is reported to boost training throughput and GPU utilization for LLM-based recommenders, but the supporting experiments are not reproducible from the paper.

  6. Research on Personalized Financial Product Recommendation by Integrating Large Language Models and Graph Neural Networks

    cs.IR 2025-06 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    A hybrid LLM-plus-GNN recommender is claimed to beat collaborative filtering, LLM-only, and GNN-only baselines on financial product ranking, with NDCG@10 of 0.372.

  7. LLM-Driven E-Commerce Marketing Content Optimization: Balancing Creativity and Conversion

    cs.CL 2025-05 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    An LLM copywriting pipeline combining fine-tuning, vector search, and weighted reranking reportedly lifts CTR by 12.5% and CVR by 8.3%, but the evidence is unverifiable and internally inconsistent.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages · cited by 7 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Enhancing Intent Understanding for Ambiguous Prompts through Human-Machine Co-Adaptation,

    Y. He et al., "Enhancing Intent Understanding for Ambiguous Prompts through Human-Machine Co-Adaptation," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2501.15167, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.15167

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.15167 2025

  2. [2]

    Enhancing Low-Cost Video Editing with Lightweight Adaptors and Temporal-Aware Inversion,

    Y. He et al., "Enhancing Low-Cost Video Editing with Lightweight Adaptors and Temporal-Aware Inversion," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2501.04606, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.04606

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.04606 2025

  3. [3]

    Enhancing Code LLMs with Reinforcement Learning in Code Generation: A Survey,

    J. Wang et al., "Enhancing Code LLMs with Reinforcement Learning in Code Generation: A Survey," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2412.20367, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.20367

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.20367 2025

  4. [4]

    SCORE: Story Coherence and Retrieval Enhancement for AI Narratives,

    Q. Yi et al., "SCORE: Story Coherence and Retrieval Enhancement for AI Narratives," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2503.23512, Apr. 2025

    arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    ComposerX: Multi-Agent Symbolic Music Composition with LLMs,

    Q. Deng et al., "ComposerX: Multi-Agent Symbolic Music Composition with LLMs," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2404.18081, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.18081

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.18081 2024

  6. [6]

    Detection of AI Deepfake and Fraud in Online Payments Using GAN-Based Models,

    Z. Ke, S. Zhou, Y. Zhou, C. H. Chang, and R. Zhang, "Detection of AI Deepfake and Fraud in Online Payments Using GAN-Based Models," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2501.07033, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.07033

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.07033 2025

  7. [7]

    Identifying Money Laundering Risks in Digital Asset Transactions Based on AI Algorithms,

    Q. Yu, Z. Ke, G. Xiong, Y. Cheng, and X. Guo, "Identifying Money Laundering Risks in Digital Asset Transactions Based on AI Algorithms," in 2024 4th International Conference on Electronic Information Engineering and Computer Communication (EIECC), Dec. 27-29, 2024, pp. 1081-1085, doi: 10.1109/EIECC64539.2024.10929087

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Tail Risk Alert Based on Conditional Autoregressive VaR by Regression Quantiles and Machine Learning Algorithms,

    Z. Ke and Y. Yin, "Tail Risk Alert Based on Conditional Autoregressive VaR by Regression Quantiles and Machine Learning Algorithms," in 2024 5th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Computer Engineering (ICAICE), Nov. 8-10, 2024, pp. 527-532, doi: 10.1109/ICAICE63571.2024.10864316

    arXiv 2024

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Resource Assignment based on Core-State Value Evaluation to Handle Crosstalk and Spectrum Fragments in SDM Elastic Optical Networks,

    Y. Wang, Y. Mori, and H. Hasegawa, "Resource Assignment based on Core-State Value Evaluation to Handle Crosstalk and Spectrum Fragments in SDM Elastic Optical Networks," in 2020 Opto-Electronics and Communications Conference (OECC), Oct. 4-8, 2020, pp. 1-3, doi: 10.1109/OECC48...

    2020

  2. [10]

    Dynamic Routing and Spectrum Allocation in Elastic Optical Networks with Minimal Disruption,

    S. Behera and G. Das, "Dynamic Routing and Spectrum Allocation in Elastic Optical Networks with Minimal Disruption," in 2020 National Conference on Communications (NCC), Feb. 21-23, 2020, pp. 1-5, doi: 10.1109/NCC48643.2020.9056071

    2020

  3. [11]

    Optimizing multi-criteria k-shortest paths in graph by a natural routing genotype-based genetic algorithm,

    Y. Wang et al., "Optimizing multi-criteria k-shortest paths in graph by a natural routing genotype-based genetic algorithm," in 2018 13th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), May 31 - June 2, 2018, pp. 341-345, doi: 10.1109/ICIEA.2018.8397739

    2018

  4. [12]

    Unmasking Digital Falsehoods: A Comparative Analysis of LLM-Based Misinformation Detection Strategies,

    T. Huang, J. Yi, P. Yu, and X. Xu, "Unmasking Digital Falsehoods: A Comparative Analysis of LLM-Based Misinformation Detection Strategies," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2503.00724, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.00724

    2025 doi arXiv

  5. [13]

    Challenges and Innovations in LLM- Powered Fake News Detection: A Synthesis of Approaches and Future Directions,

    J. Yi, Z. Xu, T. Huang, and P. Yu, "Challenges and Innovations in LLM- Powered Fake News Detection: A Synthesis of Approaches and Future Directions," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2502.00339, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.00339

    2025 doi arXiv

  6. [14]

    Year-over-Year Developments in Financial Fraud Detection via Deep Learning: A Systematic Literature Review,

    Y. Chen, C. Zhao, Y. Xu, and C. Nie, "Year-over-Year Developments in Financial Fraud Detection via Deep Learning: A Systematic Literature Review," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2502.00201, Jan. 2025

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Data-driven detection of subtype-specific differentially expressed genes,

    L. Chen et al., "Data-driven detection of subtype-specific differentially expressed genes," (in eng), Sci. Rep., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 332, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-79704-1

    2021 doi

  8. [16]

    Research on Splicing Image Detection Algorithms Based on Natural Image Statistical Characteristics,

    A. Xiang, J. Zhang, Q. Yang, L. Wang, and Y. Cheng, "Research on Splicing Image Detection Algorithms Based on Natural Image Statistical Characteristics," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2404.16296, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.16296

    2024 doi arXiv

  9. [17]

    Research on Detection of Floating Objects in River and Lake Based on AI Image Recognition,

    J. Zhang, A. Xiang, Y. Cheng, Q. Yang, and L. Wang, "Research on Detection of Floating Objects in River and Lake Based on AI Image Recognition," J. Artif. Intell. Pract., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 97-106, 2024, doi: 10.23977/jaip.2024.070213

    2024

  10. [18]

    A Multimodal Fusion Network for Student Emotion Recognition Based on Transformer and Tensor Product,

    A. Xiang, Z. Qi, H. Wang, Q. Yang, and D. Ma, "A Multimodal Fusion Network for Student Emotion Recognition Based on Transformer and Tensor Product," in 2024 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Sensors, Electronics and Computer Engineering (ICSECE), Aug. 29-31, 2024, pp. 1-4, ...

    2024

  11. [19]

    Improved YOLOv5 Based on the Attention Mechanism and FasterNet for Foreign Object Detection on Railway and Airway Tracks,

    Z. Qi, D. Ma, J. Xu, A. Xiang, and H. Qu, "Improved YOLOv5 Based on the Attention Mechanism and FasterNet for Foreign Object Detection on Railway and Airway Tracks," in 2024 Asian Conference on Communication and Networks (ASIANComNet), Oct. 2024, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/ASIANCom...

    2024

  12. [20]

    Attention Mechanism and Context Modeling System for Text Mining Machine Translation,

    B. Shi, Y. Zhang, J. Huang, S. Liu, Z. Chen, and Z. Li, "Attention Mechanism and Context Modeling System for Text Mining Machine Translation," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2408.04216, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2408.04216

    2024 doi arXiv

  13. [21]

    Research on Autonomous Driving Decision-making Strategies based Deep Reinforcement Learning,

    Z. Wang, H. Yan, C. Wei, J. Wang, and M. Xiao, "Research on Autonomous Driving Decision-making Strategies based Deep Reinforcement Learning," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2408.03084, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.03084

    2024 doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    A Novel Texture Extraction Method for the Sedimentary Structures’ Classification of Petroleum Imaging Logging,

    H. Gao et al., "A Novel Texture Extraction Method for the Sedimentary Structures’ Classification of Petroleum Imaging Logging," Singapore, Oct. 2016: Springer Singapore, in Pattern Recognition, pp. 161-172

    2016

  15. [23]

    Research on Improved U-net Based Remote Sensing Image Segmentation Algorithm,

    Q. Yang, Z. Wang, S. Liu, and Z. Li, "Research on Improved U-net Based Remote Sensing Image Segmentation Algorithm," in 2024 6th International Conference on Internet of Things, Automation and Artificial Intelligence (IoTAAI), Jul. 26-28, 2024, pp. 686-689, doi: 10.1109/IoTAAI6...

    2024

  16. [24]

    Machine Learning-Based Research on the Adaptability of Adolescents to Online Education,

    M. Wang, X. Shen, and S. Liu, "Machine Learning-Based Research on the Adaptability of Adolescents to Online Education," Appl. Comput. Eng., vol. 115, no. 1, pp. 1-7, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.54254/2755- 2721/2025.18295

    2024

  17. [25]

    Deep Learning Solutions for Pneumonia Detection: Performance Comparison of Custom and Transfer Learning Models,

    Y. Zhong, Y. Liu, E. Gao, C. Wei, Z. Wang, and C. Yan, "Deep Learning Solutions for Pneumonia Detection: Performance Comparison of Custom and Transfer Learning Models," in International Conference on Automation and Intelligent Technology (ICAIT 2024), Jun. 2024, doi: 10.1101/2...

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    & Wei, C

    Xu, Q., Feng, Z., Gong, C., Wu, X., Zhao, H., Ye, Z., ... & Wei, C. (2024). Applications of explainable AI in natural language processing. Global Academic Frontiers, 2(3), 51-64

    2024

  19. [27]

    Exploiting Diffusion Prior for Out-of-Distribution Detection,

    A. Zhu et al., "Exploiting Diffusion Prior for Out-of-Distribution Detection," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2406.11105, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2406.11105

    2024 doi arXiv

  20. [28]

    Predicting Stock Prices with FinBERT-LSTM: Integrating News Sentiment Analysis,

    W. j. Gu et al., "Predicting Stock Prices with FinBERT-LSTM: Integrating News Sentiment Analysis," in The 2024 8th International Conference on Cloud and Big Data Computing, 2024: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 67–72, doi: 10.1145/3694860.3694870

    2024

  21. [29]

    Accurate Prediction of Temperature Indicators in Eastern China Using a Multi-Scale CNN-LSTM-Attention model,

    J. Shen, W. Wu, and Q. Xu, "Accurate Prediction of Temperature Indicators in Eastern China Using a Multi-Scale CNN-LSTM-Attention model," Appl. Comput. Eng., vol. 120, no. 1, pp. 164-170, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.54254/2755-2721/2025.19481

    2025

  22. [30]

    A Mixed-Heuristic Quantum-Inspired Simplified Swarm Optimization Algorithm for scheduling of real-time tasks in the multiprocessor system,

    P.-C. Su, S.-Y. Tan, Z. Liu, and W.-C. Yeh, "A Mixed-Heuristic Quantum-Inspired Simplified Swarm Optimization Algorithm for scheduling of real-time tasks in the multiprocessor system," Appl. Soft. Comput., vol. 131, p. 109807, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2022.109807

    2022

  23. [31]

    Dynamic Fraud Detection: Integrating Reinforcement Learning into Graph Neural Networks,

    Y. Dong, J. Yao, J. Wang, Y. Liang, S. Liao, and M. Xiao, "Dynamic Fraud Detection: Integrating Reinforcement Learning into Graph Neural Networks," in 2024 6th International Conference on Data-driven Optimization of Complex Systems (DOCS), Aug. 16-18, 2024, pp. 818- 823, doi: ...

    2024

  24. [32]

    DRAL: Deep Reinforcement Adaptive Learning for Multi- UAVs Navigation in Unknown Indoor Environment,

    K. Mo et al., "DRAL: Deep Reinforcement Adaptive Learning for Multi- UAVs Navigation in Unknown Indoor Environment," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2409.03930, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.03930

    2024 doi arXiv

  25. [33]

    Predicting Employee Turnover in the Financial Company: A Comparative Study of CatBoost and XGBoost Models,

    Z. Yin, B. Hu, and S. Chen, "Predicting Employee Turnover in the Financial Company: A Comparative Study of CatBoost and XGBoost Models," Appl. Comput. Eng., vol. 116, no. 1, pp. 136-142, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.54254/2755-2721/116/20251735

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    An Ensemble Approach to Stock Price Prediction Using Deep Learning and Time Series Models,

    M. Sui, C. Zhang, L. Zhou, S. Liao, and C. Wei, "An Ensemble Approach to Stock Price Prediction Using Deep Learning and Time Series Models," in 2024 IEEE 6th International Conference on Power, Intelligent Computing and Systems (ICPICS), Jul. 26-28, 2024, pp. 793- 797, doi: 10....

    2024

  27. [35]

    Deep Learning for Weather Forecasting: A CNN-LSTM Hybrid Model for Predicting Historical Temperature Data,

    Y. Gong, Y. Zhang, F. Wang, and C. Lee, "Deep Learning for Weather Forecasting: A CNN-LSTM Hybrid Model for Predicting Historical Temperature Data," Appl. Comput. Eng., vol. 99, pp. 168-174, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.54254/2755-2721/99/20251758

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    Research on Effectiveness Evaluation and Optimization of Baseball Teaching Method Based on Machine Learning,

    S. Sun, J. Yuan, and Y. Yang, "Research on Effectiveness Evaluation and Optimization of Baseball Teaching Method Based on Machine Learning," Appl. Comput. Eng., vol. 115, pp. 16-22, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.54254/2755-2721/2025.18468

    2024

  29. [37]

    Real-Time Prediction for Athletes' Psychological States Using BERT-XGBoost: Enhancing Human-Computer Interaction,

    C. Duan, Z. Shu, J. Zhang, and F. Xue, "Real-Time Prediction for Athletes' Psychological States Using BERT-XGBoost: Enhancing Human-Computer Interaction," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2412.05816, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.05816

    2024 doi arXiv

  30. [38]

    Deep Learning-based Anomaly Detection and Log Analysis for Computer Networks,

    S. Wang, R. Jiang, Z. Wang, and Y. Zhou, "Deep Learning-based Anomaly Detection and Log Analysis for Computer Networks," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2407.05639, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2407.05639

    2024 doi arXiv

  31. [39]

    COVID-19 localization and recognition on chest radiographs based on Yolov5 and EfficientNet,

    T. Zhang, B. Zhang, F. Zhao, and S. Zhang, "COVID-19 localization and recognition on chest radiographs based on Yolov5 and EfficientNet," in 2022 7th International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Signal Processing (ICSP), Apr. 15-17, 2022, pp. 1827-1830, doi: 10.1109/I...

    2022

  32. [40]

    Z. Gao, Y. Tian, S. Lin, and J. Lin, "A CT Image Classification Network Framework for Lung Tumors Based on Pre-trained MobileNetV2 Model and Transfer learning, And Its Application and Market Analysis in the Medical field," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2501.04996, Jan. 2025, doi: 1...

    2025 doi arXiv

  33. [41]

    Analysis of Collective Response Reveals that COVID-19- Related Activities Start from the End of 2019 in Mainland China

    J. Liu et al., "Analysis of Collective Response Reveals that COVID-19- Related Activities Start from the End of 2019 in Mainland China " Arch. Clin. Biomed. Res., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 313-343, May 2021, doi: 10.26502/acbr.50170167

    2019 doi

  34. [42]

    II-NVM: Enhancing Map Accuracy and Consistency With Normal Vector-Assisted Mapping,

    C. Zhao et al., "II-NVM: Enhancing Map Accuracy and Consistency With Normal Vector-Assisted Mapping," IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 5465-5472, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.1109/LRA.2025.3561568

    2025

  35. [43]

    Assertion Detection in Clinical Natural Language Processing using Large Language Models,

    Y. Ji, Z. Yu, and Y. Wang, "Assertion Detection in Clinical Natural Language Processing using Large Language Models," (in eng), IEEE Int. Conf. Healthc. Inform., vol. 2024, pp. 242-247, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.1109/ichi61247.2024.00039

    2024

  36. [44]

    RAG-RLRC-LaySum at BioLaySumm: Integrating Retrieval-Augmented Generation and Readability Control for Layman Summarization of Biomedical Texts,

    Z. Gao, Y. Tian, S. Lin, and J. Lin, "RAG-RLRC-LaySum at BioLaySumm: Integrating Retrieval-Augmented Generation and Readability Control for Layman Summarization of Biomedical Texts," arXiv preprint, p. arXiv:2405.13179, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.13179

    2024 doi arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.