arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv subjects

Bryan Wilder

Publications and source records attributed to Bryan Wilder.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Beliefs and Behavior in Language Models

There is significant uncertainty about whether abstractions like beliefs or desires usefully describe the behavior of large language models (LLMs). In addition to the inherent scientific interest of this question, these latent quantities are often invoked to explain the behavior of LLMs to users or to define and evaluate harmful behaviors which are relative to intent. Nevertheless, we currently lack a means to systematically test whether concepts like "belief" are well-applied to LLMs, and hence whether they are likely to be fruitful ingredients of attempts to align models with human interests. We propose an approach for empirically studying such questions, asking whether a single latent variable inferred from the LLMs' outputs -- interpreted as a degree of belief -- allows an observer to make interpretable predictions of how the LLMs' will respond to new prompts. We find that highly capable models are usefully described as holding beliefs and that, generally, the predictability of model outputs based on an inferred latent belief tracks overall trends in model capability. Building on these findings, we provide empirical strategies to study how beliefs in LLMs can be measured, the extent to which LLMs comply with instructed decision rules or payoffs, and how beliefs evolve within individual instances of an LLM over the course of reasoning.

cs.AI

Representation Learning for Sample-Efficient CATE Estimation by Leveraging Multiple Outcomes

Estimating conditional average treatment effects (CATE) enables efficient targeting of interventions, but many applications have limited experimental samples, making it difficult to estimate heterogeneous effects from high-dimensional covariates. In such settings, policymakers and medical practitioners often succumb to the curse of dimensionality or apply off-the-shelf dimension reduction methods that may not preserve treatment heterogeneity. Yet these domains often come with large historical datasets measuring a wide range of outcomes -- a source of supervision that is rarely exploited in practice. Following causal representation learning, we hypothesize that such domains with high-dimensional covariates have lower-dimensional underlying dynamics. We can thus leverage the diverse outcomes measured in historical data to learn a lower-dimensional representation of the covariates. Theoretically, we prove that when the auxiliary outcomes satisfy a set of surrogacy conditions and the representation retains relevant covariate information, the original CATE is identified when the high-dimensional covariates are replaced by the learned representation. Combined with existing dimension-dependent rates for CATE estimation, the result implies greater sample-efficiency on the same experimental sample. Additionally, we characterize the bias-variance tradeoff when the assumptions do not hold perfectly, and show that the representation-based estimator can still achieve lower error when the reduction in estimator variance outweighs the bias due to compression. Empirically, we evaluate the method on synthetic data and semi-synthetic medical data.

cs.LG

Population-Robust Feature Selection via Generalized Welfare Optimization

Choosing which features to collect is a deployment decision: the same limited questionnaire, test panel, or sensor set may need to serve several heterogeneous populations. Standard feature-selection methods typically optimize for one large population, while existing robust approaches tend to learn one shared model for every population. We introduce PopFS, a method for learning one shared, deployable feature set that is robust to population differences while letting each pop- ulation train its own model. PopFS uses a tunable welfare objective that lets practitioners balance overall predictive ben- efit against stronger protection of the populations that benefit least. To make this objective practical at scale, PopFS first uses multitask sparse learning to reduce the candidate pool, then searches directly over hard feature sets by ranking promising additions and swaps and fully refitting only a shortlist. Across eight population splits from six prediction tasks drawn from five tabular and public-health datasets, PopFS consistently achieves strong average and worst-population performance while scaling to thousands of candidate features. A 43-state COVID-19 nowcasting study further shows that changing the welfare objective can improve the least-served states with lit- tle change in average performance and yields an interpretable change in the selected symptom signals. Our code is available at https://github.com/Rachel-Lyu/PopFS.

cs.LG

High-Stakes Decisions with Language Models: Insights from Emergency Triage

High-stakes decisions under uncertainty, such as medical emergency triage, require more than accurate predictions. They depend on estimating the likelihood of alternative outcomes while explicitly weighing the consequences of different actions, principles that have long formed the foundation of medical diagnosis and decision making. Yet language models are increasingly used for high-stakes clinical recommendations without explicit specification of the utilities governing these decisions. Here we show that emergency triage with language models can be understood within a probabilistic decision framework, providing a case study of a broader decision-analytic paradigm for steering, evaluating, and deploying language models in high-stakes settings. Using clinical vignettes from a structured evaluation of a consumer triage system, we analyze recommendations for treatment under alternative utility functions that specify the relative costs of missed emergencies and unnecessary escalation. We find that capable language models adjust recommendations in response to stated utilities, revealing that the same underlying predictions can support markedly different decision policies. These findings show that effective deployment depends not only on improving predictions but also on making decision objectives explicit. More broadly, they suggest that language models for high-stakes applications should be understood and evaluated as probabilistic decision systems whose recommendations depend jointly on predictive performance and explicit utilities.

cs.AI

Robust Human-AI Complementarity under Uncertainty

Machine learning models are often intended to augment rather than replace human decision makers, by providing information that is complementary to human judgement. Yet, in practice, human decision makers routinely fail to realize such complementary gains, even when models provide useful signal. In this work, we study how asymmetric information about the quality of information available to a human decision maker vs. an AI impacts the ability of a decision maker to extract complementary value from AI predictions. We show that a key factor is the error correlation structure between human and AI predictions. In particular, when the AI's prediction errors are \textit{negatively correlated} with those of the human, the decision maker can construct robust strategies which guarantee improvements in expected utility. We empirically investigate whether these conditions for complementarity arise in practice, using real-world forecasting benchmarks.

cs.LG

Bridging Predictions and Interventions: An Integrated Framework for Automated Decision-Systems

Automated decision systems (ADS) leverage predictions about individual future outcomes to inform consequential decision-making in organizational settings. Across various settings - including criminal pretrial release, clinical triage, student support, and more - it is often assumed that improved predictive accuracy is the priority consideration in determining better downstream outcomes upon the deployment of ADS. In practice, real-world case studies reveal that this is far from the case: introducing individual predictions into decision-making modifies organizational workflows, assessment, and decision-making processes in ways that require a complete re-consideration of our approach to the design, evaluation, and deployment of ADS. As a result, this Perspective develops an integrated framework for studying ADS in social systems, shifting current priorities from a purely prediction-based paradigm towards an intervention-oriented view that accounts for real-world conditions. Our aim is to improve our understanding of ADS and more meaningfully anticipate its downstream societal and organizational consequences.

cs.CY

What Must Generalist Agents Remember?

This paper develops a formal account of what generalist agents must store in memory in order to act near-optimally across multiple environments and goals. It shows that when two domains share an observational bottleneck but require incompatible optimal actions, any uniformly near-optimal policy must induce distinct memory distributions at that bottleneck. The result yields a separation theorem: sufficiently successful agents cannot rely only on current state observations, but must preserve domain-relevant information in memory. The paper further shows that if an agent's memory contains enough information to estimate values for related goals, then that memory can be used to approximately reconstruct the agent's local transition dynamics. Together, these results characterize memory as the substrate that supports domain disambiguation, transition-model reconstruction, and planning for generalist agents.

cs.AI

Learning Treatment Effects during Resource Allocation via Priority-Queue Randomization

Public service programs often allocate limited resources under uncertainty about their benefits, creating a need for randomization to support credible evaluation. In practice, however, applicants commonly enter waitlists where resources are prioritized toward individuals judged to have higher need through tiered priority queues, making direct randomization difficult. Motivated by this, we develop an experimental design framework for learning treatment effects while treating those most in need where incoming applicants are randomized into priority queues based on their assessed risk scores. Treatments are then provided across queues in priority order and first-in-first-out within queue as budget becomes available. Our contributions are two-fold. First, we characterize what causal effects are identified under this priority-queue allocation. When arrivals are exogenous, treatments are conditionally randomized, and hence standard estimands are identified; when arrivals are endogenous, queue randomization instead provides an instrument for treatment, identifying local treatment effects induced by the queuing process. Second, we develop optimized queue-assignment designs that trade off statistical efficiency against prioritizing higher-need applicants. We show in the process that, despite dependence in treatment assignments induced by the design, usual iid efficiency bounds remain well-justified design objectives. We illustrate the proposed designs using data from a housing allocation program in a large U.S. county.

cs.LG

Healthcare LLM Benchmarks Are Only as Good as Their Explicit Assumptions

Benchmarks are necessary for healthcare evaluation, but are not sufficient for predicting deployment performance. Our position is that the evaluation--deployment gap arises not because of poorly designed benchmarks, but from implicit assumptions about how users interact with models that cannot be surfaced from benchmarks alone. To make this precise, we propose a classification of assumptions into two categories: task, which can be tested from conversation data alone, and outcome, which requires outcome data and behavioral studies for testing. Critically, outcome assumptions depend on human behavior, something that even well-designed benchmarks cannot directly observe. To demonstrate the operationality of this framework, we retrospectively analyze a healthcare RCT as a case study and find that the gap naturally separates into task and outcome gaps of roughly equal size. To address this, we make two contributions: first, we propose BenchmarkCards, an artifact that documents assumptions, and second, we propose staged evaluation, a procedure that systematically tests assumptions and evaluates performance.

cs.CY

The Limits of AI-Driven Allocation: Optimal Screening under Aleatoric Uncertainty

The rise of machine learning has shifted targeted resource allocation in policy and humanitarian settings toward algorithmic targeting based on predicted risk scores. This approach is typically cheaper and faster than traditional screening procedures that directly observe the latent vulnerability status through physical verification. Yet, even access to the true conditional vulnerability probability cannot eliminate misallocation: aleatoric uncertainty over individual vulnerability status is irreducible, and probabilistic targeting inevitably misallocates some resources. In this work we study how screening and algorithmic targeting should be optimally combined in a two-stage allocation framework where a screening stage observes true outcomes for a subset of units before a final allocation stage assigns the resource under a fixed coverage budget. We show that the optimal strategy screens units at the margin of algorithmic allocation, while directly targeting the highest-risk units. Furthermore, we empirically characterize when screening and algorithmic targeting act as complements or substitutes: efficiency gains from screening grow as the aleatoric uncertainty in the population increases. We illustrate our framework with applications in income-based social protection programs and humanitarian demining in Colombia, where the tension between screening costs and allocation efficiency is operationally consequential.

cs.AI

Can Revealed Preferences Clarify LLM Alignment and Steering?

LLMs are increasingly used to make or support high-stakes decisions under uncertainty, where alignment depends not only on factual accuracy but on how models weigh tradeoffs between different outcomes. We present an empirical pipeline for estimating the implied preferences that an LLM's observed choices optimize: we elicit the model's probability distribution over unknowns along with the choice it would make for the decision task and then fit a discrete choice model to recover the cost function that best rationalizes the model's decisions. We show how this revealed-preference description allows rigorous evaluation of whether models behave in a consistently goal-directed way, whether they can verbalize a description of their objectives which matches their revealed decision policy, and whether prompting can reliably steer those policies to implement a user-specified cost function. We apply this evaluation across four medical diagnosis domains and multiple frontier and open-source models. We find that while many models have a nontrivial degree of internal coherence, they also have significant weaknesses in faithfully reporting or adopting preferences in response to user direction.

cs.LG

SpatialEpiBench: Benchmarking Spatial Information and Epidemic Priors in Forecasting

Accurate epidemic forecasting is crucial for public health response, resource allocation, and outbreak intervention, but remains difficult with sparse, noisy, and highly non-stationary data. Because epidemics unfold across interacting regions, spatiotemporal methods are natural candidates for improving forecasts. Despite growing interest in spatial information, no standardized benchmark exists, and current evaluations often use simple chronological train-test splits that do not reflect real-time forecasting practice. We address this gap with SpatialEpiBench, a challenging benchmark for spatiotemporal epidemic forecasting in realistic public-health settings. SpatialEpiBench includes 11 epidemic datasets with standardized rolling evaluations and outbreak-specific metrics. We evaluate adjacency-informed forecasting models with widely used epidemic priors that adapt general models to epidemiology, but find that most methods underperform a simple last-value baseline from 1 day to 1 month ahead, even during outbreaks and with these priors. We identify three major failure modes: (1) poor outbreak anticipation, (2) difficulty handling sparsity and noise, and (3) limited utility of common geographic adjacency for epidemiological spatial information. We release benchmark data, code, and instructions at https://github.com/Rachel-Lyu/SpatialEpiBench to support development of operationally useful epidemic forecasting models.

cs.AI

Developing and evaluating a chatbot to support maternal health care

The ability to provide trustworthy maternal health information using phone-based chatbots can have a significant impact, particularly in low-resource settings where users have low health literacy and limited access to care. However, deploying such systems is technically challenging: user queries are short, underspecified, and code-mixed across languages, answers require regional context-specific grounding, and partial or missing symptom context makes safe routing decisions difficult. We present a chatbot for maternal health in India developed through a partnership between academic researchers, a health tech company, a public health nonprofit, and a hospital. The system combines (1) stage-aware triage, routing high-risk queries to expert templates, (2) hybrid retrieval over curated maternal/newborn guidelines, and (3) evidence-conditioned generation from an LLM. Our core contribution is an evaluation workflow for high-stakes deployment under limited expert supervision. Targeting both component-level and end-to-end testing, we introduce: (i) a labeled triage benchmark (N=150) achieving 86.7% emergency recall, explicitly reporting the missed-emergency vs. over-escalation trade-off; (ii) a synthetic multi-evidence retrieval benchmark (N=100) with chunk-level evidence labels; (iii) LLM-as-judge comparison on real queries (N=781) using clinician-codesigned criteria; and (iv) expert validation. Our findings show that trustworthy medical assistants in multilingual, noisy settings require defense-in-depth design paired with multi-method evaluation, rather than any single model and evaluation method choice.

cs.AI

IV Co-Scientist: Multi-Agent LLM Framework for Causal Instrumental Variable Discovery

In the presence of confounding between an endogenous variable and the outcome, instrumental variables (IVs) are used to isolate the causal effect of the endogenous variable. Identifying valid instruments requires interdisciplinary knowledge, creativity, and contextual understanding, making it a non-trivial task. In this paper, we investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can aid in this task. We perform a two-stage evaluation framework. First, we test whether LLMs can recover well-established instruments from the literature, assessing their ability to replicate standard reasoning. Second, we evaluate whether LLMs can identify and avoid instruments that have been empirically or theoretically discredited. Building on these results, we introduce IV Co-Scientist, a multi-agent system that proposes, critiques, and refines IVs for a given treatment-outcome pair. We also introduce a statistical test to contextualize consistency in the absence of ground truth. Our results show the potential of LLMs to discover valid instrumental variables from a large observational database.

cs.AI

When Agents Say One Thing and Do Another: Validating Elicited Beliefs from LLMs

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings where good decisions require forming beliefs over the probability of unknown outcomes. However, it is unclear whether LLMs act as if they hold coherent beliefs when making decisions, or if so, how we could validate models' reports of such beliefs. We propose a decision-theoretic framework that elicits both probability judgments and decisions from an agent and tests their mutual consistency. Formally, our methods characterize whether it is possible for the actions to be produced by a ``near-rational" decision maker who holds the elicited probability as their true belief. We show that, perhaps surprisingly, this formalization implies empirically testable conditions even without any assumption about the agent's utility function. Applying our framework to stylized clinical diagnosis tasks, we find that models' reported beliefs are demonstrably imperfect summaries of the information revealed in their decisions, but that the discrepancies are small for the strongest models.

cs.AI

Combining digital data streams and epidemic networks for real time outbreak detection

Responding to disease outbreaks requires close surveillance of their trajectories, but outbreak detection is hindered by the high noise in epidemic time series. Aggregating information across data sources has shown great denoising ability in other fields, but remains underexplored in epidemiology. Here, we present LRTrend, an interpretable machine learning framework to identify outbreaks in real time. LRTrend effectively aggregates diverse health and behavioral data streams within one region and learns disease-specific epidemic networks to aggregate information across regions. We reveal diverse epidemic clusters and connections across the United States that are not well explained by commonly used human mobility networks and may be informative for future public health coordination. We apply LRTrend to 2 years of COVID-19 data in 305 hospital referral regions and frequently detect regional Delta and Omicron waves within 2 weeks of the outbreak's start, when case counts are a small fraction of the wave's resulting peak.

cs.LG

OEUVRE: OnlinE Unbiased Variance-Reduced loss Estimation

Online learning algorithms continually update their models as data arrive, making it essential to accurately estimate the expected loss at the current time step. The prequential method is an effective estimation approach which can be practically deployed in various ways. However, theoretical guarantees have previously been established under strong conditions on the algorithm, and practical algorithms have hyperparameters which require careful tuning. We introduce OEUVRE, an estimator that evaluates each incoming sample on the function learned at the current and previous time steps, recursively updating the loss estimate in constant time and memory. We use algorithmic stability, a property satisfied by many popular online learners, for optimal updates and prove consistency, convergence rates, and concentration bounds for our estimator. We design a method to adaptively tune OEUVRE's hyperparameters and test it across diverse online and stochastic tasks. We observe that OEUVRE matches or outperforms other estimators even when their hyperparameters are tuned with oracle access to ground truth.

stat.ML

Distributionally Robust Feature Selection

We study the problem of selecting limited features to observe such that models trained on them can perform well simultaneously across multiple subpopulations. This problem has applications in settings where collecting each feature is costly, e.g. requiring adding survey questions or physical sensors, and we must be able to use the selected features to create high-quality downstream models for different populations. Our method frames the problem as a continuous relaxation of traditional variable selection using a noising mechanism, without requiring backpropagation through model training processes. By optimizing over the variance of a Bayes-optimal predictor, we develop a model-agnostic framework that balances overall performance of downstream prediction across populations. We validate our approach through experiments on both synthetic datasets and real-world data.

cs.LG