Glenn Matlin

AI
h-index29
5papers
11citations
Novelty37%
AI Score44

5 Papers

LGOct 26, 2022
UnfoldML: Cost-Aware and Uncertainty-Based Dynamic 2D Prediction for Multi-Stage Classification

Yanbo Xu, Alind Khare, Glenn Matlin et al. · gatech

Machine Learning (ML) research has focused on maximizing the accuracy of predictive tasks. ML models, however, are increasingly more complex, resource intensive, and costlier to deploy in resource-constrained environments. These issues are exacerbated for prediction tasks with sequential classification on progressively transitioned stages with ''happens-before'' relation between them.We argue that it is possible to ''unfold'' a monolithic single multi-class classifier, typically trained for all stages using all data, into a series of single-stage classifiers. Each single-stage classifier can be cascaded gradually from cheaper to more expensive binary classifiers that are trained using only the necessary data modalities or features required for that stage. UnfoldML is a cost-aware and uncertainty-based dynamic 2D prediction pipeline for multi-stage classification that enables (1) navigation of the accuracy/cost tradeoff space, (2) reducing the spatio-temporal cost of inference by orders of magnitude, and (3) early prediction on proceeding stages. UnfoldML achieves orders of magnitude better cost in clinical settings, while detecting multi-stage disease development in real time. It achieves within 0.1% accuracy from the highest-performing multi-class baseline, while saving close to 20X on spatio-temporal cost of inference and earlier (3.5hrs) disease onset prediction. We also show that UnfoldML generalizes to image classification, where it can predict different level of labels (from coarse to fine) given different level of abstractions of a image, saving close to 5X cost with as little as 0.4% accuracy reduction.

CLJun 18, 2025Code
Finance Language Model Evaluation (FLaME)

Glenn Matlin, Mika Okamoto, Huzaifa Pardawala et al. · gatech

Language Models (LMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities with core Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks. The effectiveness of LMs for highly specialized knowledge-intensive tasks in finance remains difficult to assess due to major gaps in the methodologies of existing evaluation frameworks, which have caused an erroneous belief in a far lower bound of LMs' performance on common Finance NLP (FinNLP) tasks. To demonstrate the potential of LMs for these FinNLP tasks, we present the first holistic benchmarking suite for Financial Language Model Evaluation (FLaME). We are the first research paper to comprehensively study LMs against 'reasoning-reinforced' LMs, with an empirical study of 23 foundation LMs over 20 core NLP tasks in finance. We open-source our framework software along with all data and results.

AIFeb 2
Trust by Design: Skill Profiles for Transparent, Cost-Aware LLM Routing

Mika Okamoto, Ansel Kaplan Erol, Glenn Matlin

How should Large Language Model (LLM) practitioners select the right model for a task without wasting money? We introduce BELLA (Budget-Efficient LLM Selection via Automated skill-profiling), a framework that recommends optimal LLM selection for tasks through interpretable skill-based model selection. Standard benchmarks report aggregate metrics that obscure which specific capabilities a task requires and whether a cheaper model could suffice. BELLA addresses this gap through three stages: (1) decomposing LLM outputs and extract the granular skills required by using critic-based profiling, (2) clustering skills into structured capability matrices, and (3) multi-objective optimization to select the right models to maximize performance while respecting budget constraints. BELLA provides natural-language rationale for recommendations, providing transparency that current black-box routing systems lack. We describe the framework architecture, situate it within the landscape of LLM routing and evaluation, and discuss its application to financial reasoning as a representative domain exhibiting diverse skill requirements and cost-variation across models. Our framework enables practitioners to make principled and cost-performance trade-offs for deploying LLMs.

AISep 21, 2025
Shall We Play a Game? Language Models for Open-ended Wargames

Glenn Matlin, Parv Mahajan, Isaac Song et al. · gatech

Wargames are simulations of conflicts in which participants' decisions influence future events. While casual wargaming can be used for entertainment or socialization, serious wargaming is used by experts to explore strategic implications of decision-making and experiential learning. In this paper, we take the position that Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, such as Language Models (LMs), are rapidly approaching human-expert capability for strategic planning -- and will one day surpass it. Military organizations have begun using LMs to provide insights into the consequences of real-world decisions during _open-ended wargames_ which use natural language to convey actions and outcomes. We argue the ability for AI systems to influence large-scale decisions motivates additional research into the safety, interpretability, and explainability of AI in open-ended wargames. To demonstrate, we conduct a scoping literature review with a curated selection of 100 unclassified studies on AI in wargames, and construct a novel ontology of open-endedness using the creativity afforded to players, adjudicators, and the novelty provided to observers. Drawing from this body of work, we distill a set of practical recommendations and critical safety considerations for deploying AI in open-ended wargames across common domains. We conclude by presenting the community with a set of high-impact open research challenges for future work.

CLAug 13, 2025
Do Language Models Agree with Human Perceptions of Suspense in Stories?

Glenn Matlin, Devin Zhang, Rodrigo Barroso Loza et al. · gatech

Suspense is an affective response to narrative text that is believed to involve complex cognitive processes in humans. Several psychological models have been developed to describe this phenomenon and the circumstances under which text might trigger it. We replicate four seminal psychological studies of human perceptions of suspense, substituting human responses with those of different open-weight and closed-source LMs. We conclude that while LMs can distinguish whether a text is intended to induce suspense in people, LMs cannot accurately estimate the relative amount of suspense within a text sequence as compared to human judgments, nor can LMs properly capture the human perception for the rise and fall of suspense across multiple text segments. We probe the abilities of LM suspense understanding by adversarially permuting the story text to identify what cause human and LM perceptions of suspense to diverge. We conclude that, while LMs can superficially identify and track certain facets of suspense, they do not process suspense in the same way as human readers.