Daniel Feldman

Malachy Moran, Kayla Woputz, Derrick Hee et al.

Accurately estimating the snowpack in key mountainous basins is critical for water resource managers to make decisions that impact local and global economies, wildlife, and public policy. Currently, this estimation requires multiple LiDAR-equipped plane flights or in situ measurements, both of which are expensive, sparse, and biased towards accessible regions. In this paper, we demonstrate that fusing spatial and temporal information from multiple, openly-available satellite and weather data sources enables estimation of snowpack in key mountainous regions. Our multisource model outperforms single-source estimation by 5.0 inches RMSE, as well as outperforms sparse in situ measurements by 1.2 inches RMSE.

David Wingate, Sheryl Carty, Joshua Coates et al.

As large language models become a default source of guidance on personal, moral, and existential questions, it matters whether they draw on the religious frameworks that have historically shaped such reasoning, or systematically omit them. In this paper, we ask a deliberately narrow question: when posed an everyday ethical question for which religious perspectives may be valuable, do LLMs invoke religion at all? In contrast to benchmarks that look for the presence of political leanings or social bias, we look for the absence of religious representation as a dimension of value alignment and bias in LLMs. We term this ``omissive bias.'' To measure omissive bias, we contribute the AllFaith Religious Representation Benchmark: 150 ethically and personally salient questions, sourced from in-the-wild chat transcripts and faith-community contributors, paired with an LLM-as-judge rubric that gives full credit for any mention of a religion, a religious practice, or a religious leader. The questions are not themselves about religion--they are open-ended questions about grief, forgiveness, relationships, purpose, and honesty, where religion is one valuable perspective among several. We also run a human-subjects survey to compare LLM behavior against human expectations. Evaluating 27 models, we find that LLMs consistently underrepresent religion relative to human expectations. The omission is asymmetric: models invoke religion more readily for abstract existential questions (meaning, death, truth) than for the practical personal situations--grief, marriage, family conflict, addiction--where many people most rely on it. It is not our purpose to adjudicate which values LLMs should hold. We argue, more modestly, that current LLM responses overlook critical opportunities to reflect religious frameworks that many people draw on when navigating personal and ethical challenges.

Ben Mussay, Daniel Feldman, Samson Zhou et al.

Model compression is crucial for deployment of neural networks on devices with limited computational and memory resources. Many different methods show comparable accuracy of the compressed model and similar compression rates. However, the majority of the compression methods are based on heuristics and offer no worst-case guarantees on the trade-off between the compression rate and the approximation error for an arbitrarily new sample. We propose the first efficient structured pruning algorithm with a provable trade-off between its compression rate and the approximation error for any future test sample. Our method is based on the coreset framework and it approximates the output of a layer of neurons/filters by a coreset of neurons/filters in the previous layer and discards the rest. We apply this framework in a layer-by-layer fashion from the bottom to the top. Unlike previous works, our coreset is data independent, meaning that it provably guarantees the accuracy of the function for any input $x\in \mathbb{R}^d$, including an adversarial one.