BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Zhengren Wang

Zhengren Wang contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computation and LanguageComputer Vision

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
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

2 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

CiteVQA: Benchmarking Evidence Attribution for Trustworthy Document Intelligence

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have significantly advanced document understanding, yet current Doc-VQA evaluations score only the final answer and leave the supporting evidence unchecked. This answer-only approach masks a critical failure mode: a model can land on the correct answer while grounding it in the wrong passage -- a critical risk in high-stakes domains like law, finance, and medicine, where every conclusion must be traceable to a specific source region. To address this, we introduce CiteVQA, a benchmark that requires models to return element-level bounding-box citations alongside each answer, evaluating both jointly. CiteVQA comprises 1,897 questions across 711 PDFs spanning seven domains and two languages, averaging 40.6 pages per document. To ensure fidelity and scalability, the ground-truth citations are generated by an automated pipeline-which identifies crucial evidence via masking ablation-and are subsequently validated through expert review. At the core of our evaluation is Strict Attributed Accuracy (SAA), which credits a prediction only when the answer and the cited region are both correct. Auditing 20 MLLMs reveals a pervasive Attribution Hallucination: models frequently produce the right answer while citing the wrong region. The strongest system (Gemini-3.1-Pro-Preview) achieves an SAA of only 76.0, and the strongest open-source MLLM reaches just 22.5. Ultimately, towards trustworthy document intelligence, CiteVQA exposes a reliability gap that answer-only evaluations overlook, providing the instrumentation needed to close it. Our repository is available at https://github.com/opendatalab/CiteVQA.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2025arXiv

xVerify: Efficient Answer Verifier for Reasoning Model Evaluations

With the release of OpenAI's o1 model, reasoning models that adopt slow-thinking strategies have become increasingly common. Their outputs often contain complex reasoning, intermediate steps, and self-reflection, making existing evaluation methods and reward models inadequate. In particular, they struggle to judge answer equivalence and to reliably extract final answers from long, complex responses. To address this challenge, we propose xVerify, an efficient answer verifier for evaluating reasoning models. xVerify shows strong equivalence judgment capabilities, enabling accurate comparison between model outputs and reference answers across diverse question types. To train and evaluate xVerify, we construct the VAR dataset, which consists of question-answer pairs generated by multiple LLMs across various datasets. The dataset incorporates multiple reasoning models and challenging evaluation sets specifically designed for reasoning assessment, with a multi-round annotation process to ensure label quality. Based on VAR, we train xVerify models at different scales. Experimental results on both test and generalization sets show that all xVerify variants achieve over 95% F1 score and accuracy. Notably, the smallest model, xVerify-0.5B-I, outperforms all evaluation methods except GPT-4o, while xVerify-3B-Ib surpasses GPT-4o in overall performance. In addition, reinforcement learning experiments using xVerify as the reward model yield an 18.4% improvement for Qwen2.5-7B compared with direct generation, exceeding the gains achieved with Math Verify as the reward. These results demonstrate the effectiveness and generalizability of xVerify. All xVerify resources are available on \href{https://github.com/IAAR-Shanghai/xVerify}{GitHub}.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access