Researcher profile

Cunxiang Wang

Cunxiang Wang contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

DVD: A Robust Method for Detecting Variant Contamination in Large Language Model Evaluation

Evaluating large language models (LLMs) is increasingly confounded by \emph{variant contamination}: the training corpus contains semantically equivalent yet lexically or syntactically altered versions of test items. Unlike verbatim leakage, these paraphrased or structurally transformed variants evade existing detectors based on sampling consistency or perplexity, thereby inflating benchmark scores via memorization rather than genuine reasoning. We formalize this problem and introduce \textbf{DVD} (\textbf{D}etection via \textbf{V}ariance of generation \textbf{D}istribution), a single-sample detector that models the local output distribution induced by temperature sampling. Our key insight is that contaminated items trigger alternation between a \emph{memory-adherence} state and a \emph{perturbation-drift} state, yielding abnormally high variance in the synthetic difficulty of low-probability tokens; uncontaminated items remain in drift with comparatively smooth variance. We construct the first benchmark for variant contamination across two domains Omni-MATH and SuperGPQA by generating and filtering semantically equivalent variants, and simulate contamination via fine-tuning models of different scales and architectures (Qwen2.5 and Llama3.1). Across datasets and models, \textbf{DVD} consistently outperforms perplexity-based, Min-$k$\%++, edit-distance (CDD), and embedding-similarity baselines, while exhibiting strong robustness to hyperparameters. Our results establish variance of the generation distribution as a principled and practical fingerprint for detecting variant contamination in LLM evaluation.

preprint2023arXiv

A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are gaining increasing popularity in both academia and industry, owing to their unprecedented performance in various applications. As LLMs continue to play a vital role in both research and daily use, their evaluation becomes increasingly critical, not only at the task level, but also at the society level for better understanding of their potential risks. Over the past years, significant efforts have been made to examine LLMs from various perspectives. This paper presents a comprehensive review of these evaluation methods for LLMs, focusing on three key dimensions: what to evaluate, where to evaluate, and how to evaluate. Firstly, we provide an overview from the perspective of evaluation tasks, encompassing general natural language processing tasks, reasoning, medical usage, ethics, educations, natural and social sciences, agent applications, and other areas. Secondly, we answer the `where' and `how' questions by diving into the evaluation methods and benchmarks, which serve as crucial components in assessing performance of LLMs. Then, we summarize the success and failure cases of LLMs in different tasks. Finally, we shed light on several future challenges that lie ahead in LLMs evaluation. Our aim is to offer invaluable insights to researchers in the realm of LLMs evaluation, thereby aiding the development of more proficient LLMs. Our key point is that evaluation should be treated as an essential discipline to better assist the development of LLMs. We consistently maintain the related open-source materials at: https://github.com/MLGroupJLU/LLM-eval-survey.

preprint2020arXiv

Commonsense Knowledge Graph Reasoning by Selection or Generation? Why?

Commonsense knowledge graph reasoning(CKGR) is the task of predicting a missing entity given one existing and the relation in a commonsense knowledge graph (CKG). Existing methods can be classified into two categories generation method and selection method. Each method has its own advantage. We theoretically and empirically compare the two methods, finding the selection method is more suitable than the generation method in CKGR. Given the observation, we further combine the structure of neural Text Encoder and Knowledge Graph Embedding models to solve the selection method's two problems, achieving competitive results. We provide a basic framework and baseline model for subsequent CKGR tasks by selection methods.

preprint2020arXiv

Does It Make Sense? And Why? A Pilot Study for Sense Making and Explanation

Introducing common sense to natural language understanding systems has received increasing research attention. It remains a fundamental question on how to evaluate whether a system has a sense making capability. Existing benchmarks measures commonsense knowledge indirectly and without explanation. In this paper, we release a benchmark to directly test whether a system can differentiate natural language statements that make sense from those that do not make sense. In addition, a system is asked to identify the most crucial reason why a statement does not make sense. We evaluate models trained over large-scale language modeling tasks as well as human performance, showing that there are different challenges for system sense making.

preprint2020arXiv

SemEval-2020 Task 4: Commonsense Validation and Explanation

In this paper, we present SemEval-2020 Task 4, Commonsense Validation and Explanation (ComVE), which includes three subtasks, aiming to evaluate whether a system can distinguish a natural language statement that makes sense to humans from one that does not, and provide the reasons. Specifically, in our first subtask, the participating systems are required to choose from two natural language statements of similar wording the one that makes sense and the one does not. The second subtask additionally asks a system to select the key reason from three options why a given statement does not make sense. In the third subtask, a participating system needs to generate the reason. We finally attracted 39 teams participating at least one of the three subtasks. For Subtask A and Subtask B, the performances of top-ranked systems are close to that of humans. However, for Subtask C, there is still a relatively large gap between systems and human performance. The dataset used in our task can be found at https://github.com/wangcunxiang/SemEval2020- Task4-Commonsense-Validation-and-Explanation; The leaderboard can be found at https://competitions.codalab.org/competitions/21080#results.