Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Emma Pierson

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

8 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

8

AAAI Conference 2026 Conference Paper

Urban Incident Prediction with Graph Neural Networks: Integrating Government Ratings and Crowdsourced Reports

  • Sidhika Balachandar
  • Shuvom Sadhuka
  • Bonnie Berger
  • Emma Pierson
  • Nikhil Garg

Graph neural networks (GNNs) are widely used in urban spatiotemporal forecasting, e.g., predicting infrastructure problems. In this setting, government officials aim to identify in which neighborhoods incidents like potholes or rodents occur. The true state of incidents is observed via government inspection ratings. However, these ratings are only conducted for a sparse set of neighborhoods and incident types. We also observe the state of incidents via crowdsourced reports, which are more densely observed but may be biased due to heterogeneous reporting. First, we propose a multiview, multioutput GNN-based model that uses both unbiased rating data and biased reporting data to predict the true latent state of incidents. Second, we investigate a case study of New York City urban incidents and collect a dataset of 9,615,863 crowdsourced reports and 1,041,415 government inspection ratings over 3 years and across 139 types of incidents. We show on both real and semi-synthetic data that our model can better predict the latent state compared to models that use only reporting data or only rating data. Finally, we quantify demographic biases in crowdsourced reporting, e.g., higher-income neighborhoods report problems at higher rates. Our analysis showcases a widely applicable approach for latent state prediction using heterogeneous, sparse, and biased data.

NeurIPS Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Evaluating multiple models using labeled and unlabeled data

  • Divya Shanmugam
  • Shuvom Sadhuka
  • Manish Raghavan
  • John Guttag
  • Bonnie Berger
  • Emma Pierson

It is difficult to evaluate machine learning classifiers without large labeled datasets, which are often unavailable. In contrast, unlabeled data is plentiful, but not easily used for evaluation. Here, we introduce Semi-Supervised Model Evaluation (SSME), a method that uses both labeled and unlabeled data to evaluate machine learning classifiers. The key idea is to estimate the joint distribution of ground truth labels and classifier scores using a semi-supervised mixture model. The semi-supervised mixture model allows SSME to learn from three sources of information: unlabeled data, multiple classifiers, and probabilistic classifier scores. Once fit, the mixture model enables estimation of any metric that is a function of classifier scores and ground truth labels (e. g. , accuracy or AUC). We derive theoretical bounds on the error of these estimates, showing that estimation error decreases with the number of classifiers and the amount of unlabeled data. We present experiments in four domains where obtaining large labeled datasets is often impractical: healthcare, content moderation, molecular property prediction, and text classification. Our results demonstrate that SSME estimates performance more accurately than do competing methods, reducing error by 5. 1x relative to using labeled data alone and 2. 4x relative to the next best method.

ICML Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Sparse Autoencoders for Hypothesis Generation

  • Rajiv Movva
  • Kenny Peng
  • Nikhil Garg 0001
  • Jon M. Kleinberg
  • Emma Pierson

We describe HypotheSAEs, a general method to hypothesize interpretable relationships between text data (e. g. , headlines) and a target variable (e. g. , clicks). HypotheSAEs has three steps: (1) train a sparse autoencoder on text embeddings to produce interpretable features describing the data distribution, (2) select features that predict the target variable, and (3) generate a natural language interpretation of each feature (e. g. , mentions being surprised or shocked ) using an LLM. Each interpretation serves as a hypothesis about what predicts the target variable. Compared to baselines, our method better identifies reference hypotheses on synthetic datasets (at least +0. 06 in F1) and produces more predictive hypotheses on real datasets ( twice as many significant findings), despite requiring 1-2 orders of magnitude less compute than recent LLM-based methods. HypotheSAEs also produces novel discoveries on two well-studied tasks: explaining partisan differences in Congressional speeches and identifying drivers of engagement with online headlines.

AAAI Conference 2024 Conference Paper

A Bayesian Spatial Model to Correct Under-Reporting in Urban Crowdsourcing

  • Gabriel Agostini
  • Emma Pierson
  • Nikhil Garg

Decision-makers often observe the occurrence of events through a reporting process. City governments, for example, rely on resident reports to find and then resolve urban infrastructural problems such as fallen street trees, flooded basements, or rat infestations. Without additional assumptions, there is no way to distinguish events that occur but are not reported from events that truly did not occur--a fundamental problem in settings with positive-unlabeled data. Because disparities in reporting rates correlate with resident demographics, addressing incidents only on the basis of reports leads to systematic neglect in neighborhoods that are less likely to report events. We show how to overcome this challenge by leveraging the fact that events are spatially correlated. Our framework uses a Bayesian spatial latent variable model to infer event occurrence probabilities and applies it to storm-induced flooding reports in New York City, further pooling results across multiple storms. We show that a model accounting for under-reporting and spatial correlation predicts future reports more accurately than other models, and further induces a more equitable set of inspections: its allocations better reflect the population and provide equitable service to non-white, less traditionally educated, and lower-income residents. This finding reflects heterogeneous reporting behavior learned by the model: reporting rates are higher in Census tracts with higher populations, proportions of white residents, and proportions of owner-occupied households. Our work lays the groundwork for more equitable proactive government services, even with disparate reporting behavior.

ICLR Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Domain constraints improve risk prediction when outcome data is missing

  • Sidhika Balachandar
  • Nikhil Garg 0001
  • Emma Pierson

Machine learning models are often trained to predict the outcome resulting from a human decision. For example, if a doctor decides to test a patient for disease, will the patient test positive? A challenge is that historical decision-making determines whether the outcome is observed: we only observe test outcomes for patients doctors historically tested. Untested patients, for whom outcomes are unobserved, may differ from tested patients along observed and unobserved dimensions. We propose a Bayesian model class which captures this setting. The purpose of the model is to accurately estimate risk for both tested and untested patients. Estimating this model is challenging due to the wide range of possibilities for untested patients. To address this, we propose two domain constraints which are plausible in health settings: a prevalence constraint, where the overall disease prevalence is known, and an expertise constraint, where the human decision-maker deviates from purely risk-based decision-making only along a constrained feature set. We show theoretically and on synthetic data that domain constraints improve parameter inference. We apply our model to a case study of cancer risk prediction, showing that the model's inferred risk predicts cancer diagnoses, its inferred testing policy captures known public health policies, and it can identify suboptimalities in test allocation. Though our case study is in healthcare, our analysis reveals a general class of domain constraints which can improve model estimation in many settings.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning

  • Shuyue S. Li
  • Vidhisha Balachandran
  • Shangbin Feng
  • Jonathan S. Ilgen
  • Emma Pierson
  • Pang W. Koh
  • Yulia Tsvetkov

Users typically engage with LLMs interactively, yet most existing benchmarks evaluate them in a static, single-turn format, posing reliability concerns in interactive scenarios. We identify a key obstacle towards reliability: LLMs are trained to answer any question, even with incomplete context or insufficient knowledge. In this paper, we propose to change the static paradigm to an interactive one, develop systems that proactively ask questions to gather more information and respond reliably, and introduce an benchmark—MEDIQ—to evaluate question-asking ability in LLMs. MEDIQ simulates clinical interactions consisting of a Patient System and an adaptive Expert System; with potentially incomplete initial information, the Expert refrains from making diagnostic decisions when unconfident, and instead elicits missing details via follow-up questions. We provide a pipeline to convert single-turn medical benchmarks into an interactive format. Our results show that directly prompting state-of-the-art LLMs to ask questions degrades performance, indicating that adapting LLMs to proactive information-seeking settings is nontrivial. We experiment with abstention strategies to better estimate model confidence and decide when to ask questions, improving diagnostic accuracy by 22. 3%; however, performance still lags compared to an (unrealistic in practice) upper bound with complete information upfront. Further analyses show improved interactive performance with filtering irrelevant contexts and reformatting conversations. Overall, we introduce a novel problem towards LLM reliability, an interactive MEDIQ benchmark and a novel question-asking system, and highlight directions to extend LLMs’ information-seeking abilities in critical domains.

ICML Conference 2021 Conference Paper

WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts

  • Pang Wei Koh
  • Shiori Sagawa
  • Henrik Marklund
  • Sang Michael Xie
  • Marvin Zhang
  • Akshay Balsubramani
  • Weihua Hu
  • Michihiro Yasunaga

Distribution shifts—where the training distribution differs from the test distribution—can substantially degrade the accuracy of machine learning (ML) systems deployed in the wild. Despite their ubiquity in the real-world deployments, these distribution shifts are under-represented in the datasets widely used in the ML community today. To address this gap, we present WILDS, a curated benchmark of 10 datasets reflecting a diverse range of distribution shifts that naturally arise in real-world applications, such as shifts across hospitals for tumor identification; across camera traps for wildlife monitoring; and across time and location in satellite imaging and poverty mapping. On each dataset, we show that standard training yields substantially lower out-of-distribution than in-distribution performance. This gap remains even with models trained by existing methods for tackling distribution shifts, underscoring the need for new methods for training models that are more robust to the types of distribution shifts that arise in practice. To facilitate method development, we provide an open-source package that automates dataset loading, contains default model architectures and hyperparameters, and standardizes evaluations. The full paper, code, and leaderboards are available at https: //wilds. stanford. edu.

ICML Conference 2020 Conference Paper

Concept Bottleneck Models

  • Pang Wei Koh
  • Thao Nguyen
  • Yew Siang Tang
  • Stephen Mussmann
  • Emma Pierson
  • Been Kim
  • Percy Liang

We seek to learn models that we can interact with using high-level concepts: if the model did not think there was a bone spur in the x-ray, would it still predict severe arthritis? State-of-the-art models today do not typically support the manipulation of concepts like "the existence of bone spurs", as they are trained end-to-end to go directly from raw input (e. g. , pixels) to output (e. g. , arthritis severity). We revisit the classic idea of first predicting concepts that are provided at training time, and then using these concepts to predict the label. By construction, we can intervene on these concept bottleneck models by editing their predicted concept values and propagating these changes to the final prediction. On x-ray grading and bird identification, concept bottleneck models achieve competitive accuracy with standard end-to-end models, while enabling interpretation in terms of high-level clinical concepts ("bone spurs") or bird attributes ("wing color"). These models also allow for richer human-model interaction: accuracy improves significantly if we can correct model mistakes on concepts at test time.

v2026.09.13