Xudong Shen
Author directoryOther people with similar names: Xudong Shen
Unverified author pages with similar names: Xudong Shen
2026
Truth or Sophistry? LoFa: A Benchmark for LLM Robustness Against Logical Fallacies
Xudong Shen | li Yuan | Ye Chen | Xin Wu | Yi Cai | Zhiyong Wu
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)
Xudong Shen | li Yuan | Ye Chen | Xin Wu | Yi Cai | Zhiyong Wu
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)
While Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit strong semantic capabilities, their resilience to manipulative linguistic patterns such as logical fallacies remains an underexplored area. Prior work has focused on the ability of LLMs to identify or classify fallacies, but their robustness against these fallacies in persuasive contexts remains largely unexplored.To address this gap, we introduce LoFa (Logical Fallacy), a comprehensive benchmark to evaluate LLM robustness against fallacies. We first construct the LoFa dataset via a multi-agent pipeline, pairing factual questions with fallacious arguments. Then, we develop a multi-round debate framework to assess model resilience under sustained attacks.Furthermore, to disentangle robustness from a model’s inherent knowledge limitations, we propose a new metric, LFR@k (Logical Fallacy Resistance), to quantify performance. Our experiments reveal that different LLMs exhibit varied robustness to distinct types of fallacies, highlighting unique vulnerability profiles across models.
2025
CODEMENV: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Code Migration
Keyuan Cheng | Xudong Shen | Yihao Yang | Tengyue Wang | Yang Cao | Muhammad Asif Ali | Hanbin Wang | Lijie Hu | Di Wang
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025
Keyuan Cheng | Xudong Shen | Yihao Yang | Tengyue Wang | Yang Cao | Muhammad Asif Ali | Hanbin Wang | Lijie Hu | Di Wang
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in handling a wide range of tasks within the software engineering domain, but their ability to perform code migration—adapting code to different environments—remains underexplored. In this work, we propose a novel benchmark, : Code Migration Across Environment, designed to evaluate LLMs’ performance in handling code migration tasks. The benchmark comprises 922 data points across 19 Python and Java packages, offering three tasks to systematically evaluate code migration: identifying version-incompatible functions, determining function changes, and adapting code to target environments. Experimental evaluation of across seven LLMs revealed an average pass@1 rate of 26.50%, with GPT-4o performing best at 43.84%. We highlight our key findings as follows: (i) LLMs are more familiar with newer function versions, making them better at migrating legacy code, and (ii) a logical inconsistency where LLMs sometimes identify irrelevant function changes for the target migration environment.