Caroline Choi

LG
h-index48
4papers
294citations
Novelty45%
AI Score39

4 Papers

LGNov 25, 2022Code
Wild-Time: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shift over Time

Huaxiu Yao, Caroline Choi, Bochuan Cao et al. · stanford

Distribution shift occurs when the test distribution differs from the training distribution, and it can considerably degrade performance of machine learning models deployed in the real world. Temporal shifts -- distribution shifts arising from the passage of time -- often occur gradually and have the additional structure of timestamp metadata. By leveraging timestamp metadata, models can potentially learn from trends in past distribution shifts and extrapolate into the future. While recent works have studied distribution shifts, temporal shifts remain underexplored. To address this gap, we curate Wild-Time, a benchmark of 5 datasets that reflect temporal distribution shifts arising in a variety of real-world applications, including patient prognosis and news classification. On these datasets, we systematically benchmark 13 prior approaches, including methods in domain generalization, continual learning, self-supervised learning, and ensemble learning. We use two evaluation strategies: evaluation with a fixed time split (Eval-Fix) and evaluation with a data stream (Eval-Stream). Eval-Fix, our primary evaluation strategy, aims to provide a simple evaluation protocol, while Eval-Stream is more realistic for certain real-world applications. Under both evaluation strategies, we observe an average performance drop of 20% from in-distribution to out-of-distribution data. Existing methods are unable to close this gap. Code is available at https://wild-time.github.io/.

LGJun 8, 2023
Conservative Prediction via Data-Driven Confidence Minimization

Caroline Choi, Fahim Tajwar, Yoonho Lee et al.

In safety-critical applications of machine learning, it is often desirable for a model to be conservative, abstaining from making predictions on unknown inputs which are not well-represented in the training data. However, detecting unknown examples is challenging, as it is impossible to anticipate all potential inputs at test time. To address this, prior work (Hendrycks et al., 2018) minimizes model confidence on an auxiliary outlier dataset carefully curated to be disjoint from the training distribution. We theoretically analyze the choice of auxiliary dataset for confidence minimization, revealing two actionable insights: (1) if the auxiliary set contains unknown examples similar to those seen at test time, confidence minimization leads to provable detection of unknown test examples, and (2) if the first condition is satisfied, it is unnecessary to filter out known examples for out-of-distribution (OOD) detection. Motivated by these guidelines, we propose the Data-Driven Confidence Minimization (DCM) framework, which minimizes confidence on an uncertainty dataset. We apply DCM to two problem settings in which conservative prediction is paramount -- selective classification and OOD detection -- and provide a realistic way to gather uncertainty data for each setting. In our experiments, DCM consistently outperforms existing selective classification approaches on 4 datasets when tested on unseen distributions and outperforms state-of-the-art OOD detection methods on 12 ID-OOD dataset pairs, reducing FPR (at TPR $95\%$) by $6.3\%$ and $58.1\%$ on CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 compared to Outlier Exposure.

LGJun 4, 2025Code
OpenThoughts: Data Recipes for Reasoning Models

Etash Guha, Ryan Marten, Sedrick Keh et al. · cmu

Reasoning models have made rapid progress on many benchmarks involving math, code, and science. Yet, there are still many open questions about the best training recipes for reasoning since state-of-the-art models often rely on proprietary datasets with little to no public information available. To address this, the goal of the OpenThoughts project is to create open-source datasets for training reasoning models. After initial explorations, our OpenThoughts2-1M dataset led to OpenThinker2-32B, the first model trained on public reasoning data to match DeepSeek-R1-Distill-32B on standard reasoning benchmarks such as AIME and LiveCodeBench. We then improve our dataset further by systematically investigating each step of our data generation pipeline with 1,000+ controlled experiments, which led to OpenThoughts3. Scaling the pipeline to 1.2M examples and using QwQ-32B as teacher yields our OpenThoughts3-7B model, which achieves state-of-the-art results: 53% on AIME 2025, 51% on LiveCodeBench 06/24-01/25, and 54% on GPQA Diamond - improvements of 15.3, 17.2, and 20.5 percentage points compared to the DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B. All of our datasets and models are available on https://openthoughts.ai.

LGJan 18, 2024
AutoFT: Learning an Objective for Robust Fine-Tuning

Caroline Choi, Yoonho Lee, Annie Chen et al.

Foundation models encode rich representations that can be adapted to downstream tasks by fine-tuning. However, fine-tuning a model on one data distribution often degrades performance under distribution shifts. Current approaches to robust fine-tuning use hand-crafted regularization techniques to constrain the fine-tuning process towards the pretrained model. Yet, it is hard to specify how to adapt relevant characteristics of the foundation model during fine-tuning, as this depends on how the pre-training, fine-tuning, and test data distributions relate to each other. We propose AutoFT, a data-driven approach for robust fine-tuning. Given a task, AutoFT searches for a fine-tuning procedure that enhances out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization. Specifically, AutoFT uses bi-level optimization to search for an objective function and hyperparameters that maximize post-adaptation performance on a small OOD validation set. We evaluate AutoFT on nine natural distribution shifts. Our experiments show that AutoFT significantly improves generalization to OOD inputs, outperforming existing robust fine-tuning methods. Notably, AutoFT achieves a new state-of-the-art on the WILDS iWildCam and FMoW benchmarks, outperforming the previous best methods by $6.0\%$ and $1.5\%$, respectively.