Jiongli Zhu

Jiongli Zhu, Haoquan Guan, Parjanya Prajakta Prashant et al.

Text-to-SQL ensembles improve over single-candidate generation by drawing multiple SQL candidates and selecting one, but their effectiveness is bounded by Pass@K, the probability that at least one of K candidates is correct. Existing methods source diversity heuristically through stochastic decoding or prompt variants, leaving candidate sets dominated by correlated failures. We present DivSkill-SQL, a residual skill optimization framework that builds complementary agentic Text-to-SQL ensembles without model fine-tuning: each new skill is optimized on examples the current skill ensemble fails on, provably targeting its marginal contribution to Pass@K. On Spider2-Lite, DivSkill-SQL improves selected accuracy by up to +11.1 points on Snowflake and +8.3 on BigQuery over the strongest ensemble baseline, with consistent gains across two base models (Opus-4.6 and GPT-5.4). Skills optimized on a single dialect transfer without retraining across dialects (Snowflake, BigQuery, SQLite) and to a different task formulation, such as BIRD-Critic (+2.6 pts). Error diagnostics show up to 3x fewer hallucinated schema references and function calls, indicating that gains come from genuinely reliable complementary skills rather than surface-form variation.

Jiongli Zhu, Sainyam Galhotra, Nazanin Sabri et al.

This paper proposes a novel framework for certifying the fairness of predictive models trained on biased data. It draws from query answering for incomplete and inconsistent databases to formulate the problem of consistent range approximation (CRA) of fairness queries for a predictive model on a target population. The framework employs background knowledge of the data collection process and biased data, working with or without limited statistics about the target population, to compute a range of answers for fairness queries. Using CRA, the framework builds predictive models that are certifiably fair on the target population, regardless of the availability of external data during training. The framework's efficacy is demonstrated through evaluations on real data, showing substantial improvement over existing state-of-the-art methods.

Jiongli Zhu, Geyang Xu, Felipe Lorenzi et al.

Structured data-quality issues, such as missing values correlated with demographics, culturally biased labels, or systemic selection biases, routinely degrade the reliability of machine-learning pipelines. Regulators now increasingly demand evidence that high-stakes systems can withstand these realistic, interdependent errors, yet current robustness evaluations typically use random or overly simplistic corruptions, leaving worst-case scenarios unexplored. We introduce SAVAGE, a causally inspired framework that (i) formally models realistic data-quality issues through dependency graphs and flexible corruption templates, and (ii) systematically discovers corruption patterns that maximally degrade a target performance metric. SAVAGE employs a bi-level optimization approach to efficiently identify vulnerable data subpopulations and fine-tune corruption severity, treating the full ML pipeline, including preprocessing and potentially non-differentiable models, as a black box. Extensive experiments across multiple datasets and ML tasks (data cleaning, fairness-aware learning, uncertainty quantification) demonstrate that even a small fraction (around 5 %) of structured corruptions identified by SAVAGE severely impacts model performance, far exceeding random or manually crafted errors, and invalidating core assumptions of existing techniques. Thus, SAVAGE provides a practical tool for rigorous pipeline stress-testing, a benchmark for evaluating robustness methods, and actionable guidance for designing more resilient data workflows.

Romila Pradhan, Jiongli Zhu, Boris Glavic et al.

A wide variety of fairness metrics and eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) approaches have been proposed in the literature to identify bias in machine learning models that are used in critical real-life contexts. However, merely reporting on a model's bias, or generating explanations using existing XAI techniques is insufficient to locate and eventually mitigate sources of bias. We introduce Gopher, a system that produces compact, interpretable and causal explanations for bias or unexpected model behavior by identifying coherent subsets of the training data that are root-causes for this behavior. Specifically, we introduce the concept of causal responsibility that quantifies the extent to which intervening on training data by removing or updating subsets of it can resolve the bias. Building on this concept, we develop an efficient approach for generating the top-k patterns that explain model bias that utilizes techniques from the machine learning (ML) community to approximate causal responsibility and uses pruning rules to manage the large search space for patterns. Our experimental evaluation demonstrates the effectiveness of Gopher in generating interpretable explanations for identifying and debugging sources of bias.