Researcher profile

Zenan Li

Zenan Li contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
5topics
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

4 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Uncertainty Quantification for LLM-based Code Generation

Prediction sets provide a theoretically grounded framework for quantifying uncertainty in machine learning models. Adapting them to structured generation tasks, in particular, large language model (LLM) based code generation, remains a challenging problem. An existing attempt proposes PAC prediction sets but is limited by its strong monotonicity assumption on risk and single-label classification framework, which severely limits the space of candidate programs and cannot accommodate the multiple valid outputs inherent to code generation. To address these limitations, we propose an approach RisCoSet that leverages multiple hypothesis testing to construct risk-controlling predictions for LLM-based code generation. Given a trained code generation model, we produce a prediction set represented by a partial program, which is guaranteed to contain a correct solution with high confidence. Extensive experiments on three LLMs demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method. For instance, compared with the state-of-the-art, our method can significantly reduce the code removal by up to 24.5%, at the same level of risk.

preprint2022arXiv

A General Framework for Evaluating Robustness of Combinatorial Optimization Solvers on Graphs

Solving combinatorial optimization (CO) on graphs is among the fundamental tasks for upper-stream applications in data mining, machine learning and operations research. Despite the inherent NP-hard challenge for CO, heuristics, branch-and-bound, learning-based solvers are developed to tackle CO problems as accurately as possible given limited time budgets. However, a practical metric for the sensitivity of CO solvers remains largely unexplored. Existing theoretical metrics require the optimal solution which is infeasible, and the gradient-based adversarial attack metric from deep learning is not compatible with non-learning solvers that are usually non-differentiable. In this paper, we develop the first practically feasible robustness metric for general combinatorial optimization solvers. We develop a no worse optimal cost guarantee thus do not require optimal solutions, and we tackle the non-differentiable challenge by resorting to black-box adversarial attack methods. Extensive experiments are conducted on 14 unique combinations of solvers and CO problems, and we demonstrate that the performance of state-of-the-art solvers like Gurobi can degenerate by over 20% under the given time limit bound on the hard instances discovered by our robustness metric, raising concerns about the robustness of combinatorial optimization solvers.

preprint2022arXiv

On Collective Robustness of Bagging Against Data Poisoning

Bootstrap aggregating (bagging) is an effective ensemble protocol, which is believed can enhance robustness by its majority voting mechanism. Recent works further prove the sample-wise robustness certificates for certain forms of bagging (e.g. partition aggregation). Beyond these particular forms, in this paper, \emph{we propose the first collective certification for general bagging to compute the tight robustness against the global poisoning attack}. Specifically, we compute the maximum number of simultaneously changed predictions via solving a binary integer linear programming (BILP) problem. Then we analyze the robustness of vanilla bagging and give the upper bound of the tolerable poison budget. Based on this analysis, \emph{we propose hash bagging} to improve the robustness of vanilla bagging almost for free. This is achieved by modifying the random subsampling in vanilla bagging to a hash-based deterministic subsampling, as a way of controlling the influence scope for each poisoning sample universally. Our extensive experiments show the notable advantage in terms of applicability and robustness.

preprint2020arXiv

Operational Calibration: Debugging Confidence Errors for DNNs in the Field

Trained DNN models are increasingly adopted as integral parts of software systems, but they often perform deficiently in the field. A particularly damaging problem is that DNN models often give false predictions with high confidence, due to the unavoidable slight divergences between operation data and training data. To minimize the loss caused by inaccurate confidence, operational calibration, i.e., calibrating the confidence function of a DNN classifier against its operation domain, becomes a necessary debugging step in the engineering of the whole system. Operational calibration is difficult considering the limited budget of labeling operation data and the weak interpretability of DNN models. We propose a Bayesian approach to operational calibration that gradually corrects the confidence given by the model under calibration with a small number of labeled operation data deliberately selected from a larger set of unlabeled operation data. The approach is made effective and efficient by leveraging the locality of the learned representation of the DNN model and modeling the calibration as Gaussian Process Regression. Comprehensive experiments with various practical datasets and DNN models show that it significantly outperformed alternative methods, and in some difficult tasks it eliminated about 71% to 97% high-confidence (>0.9) errors with only about 10\% of the minimal amount of labeled operation data needed for practical learning techniques to barely work.