Joshua Gardner

LG
h-index4
3papers
707citations
Novelty10%
AI Score25

3 Papers

4.9CLJun 5, 2025
UTSA-NLP at ArchEHR-QA 2025: Improving EHR Question Answering via Self-Consistency Prompting

Sara Shields-Menard, Zach Reimers, Joshua Gardner et al.

We describe our system for the ArchEHR-QA Shared Task on answering clinical questions using electronic health records (EHRs). Our approach uses large language models in two steps: first, to find sentences in the EHR relevant to a clinician's question, and second, to generate a short, citation-supported response based on those sentences. We use few-shot prompting, self-consistency, and thresholding to improve the sentence classification step to decide which sentences are essential. We compare several models and find that a smaller 8B model performs better than a larger 70B model for identifying relevant information. Our results show that accurate sentence selection is critical for generating high-quality responses and that self-consistency with thresholding helps make these decisions more reliable.

13.0LGMay 1, 2023Code
Cross-Institutional Transfer Learning for Educational Models: Implications for Model Performance, Fairness, and Equity

Josh Gardner, Renzhe Yu, Quan Nguyen et al.

Modern machine learning increasingly supports paradigms that are multi-institutional (using data from multiple institutions during training) or cross-institutional (using models from multiple institutions for inference), but the empirical effects of these paradigms are not well understood. This study investigates cross-institutional learning via an empirical case study in higher education. We propose a framework and metrics for assessing the utility and fairness of student dropout prediction models that are transferred across institutions. We examine the feasibility of cross-institutional transfer under real-world data- and model-sharing constraints, quantifying model biases for intersectional student identities, characterizing potential disparate impact due to these biases, and investigating the impact of various cross-institutional ensembling approaches on fairness and overall model performance. We perform this analysis on data representing over 200,000 enrolled students annually from four universities without sharing training data between institutions. We find that a simple zero-shot cross-institutional transfer procedure can achieve similar performance to locally-trained models for all institutions in our study, without sacrificing model fairness. We also find that stacked ensembling provides no additional benefits to overall performance or fairness compared to either a local model or the zero-shot transfer procedure we tested. We find no evidence of a fairness-accuracy tradeoff across dozens of models and transfer schemes evaluated. Our auditing procedure also highlights the importance of intersectional fairness analysis, revealing performance disparities at the intersection of sensitive identity groups that are concealed under one-dimensional analysis.

33.0LGNov 6, 2019
MLPerf Inference Benchmark

Vijay Janapa Reddi, Christine Cheng, David Kanter et al.

Machine-learning (ML) hardware and software system demand is burgeoning. Driven by ML applications, the number of different ML inference systems has exploded. Over 100 organizations are building ML inference chips, and the systems that incorporate existing models span at least three orders of magnitude in power consumption and five orders of magnitude in performance; they range from embedded devices to data-center solutions. Fueling the hardware are a dozen or more software frameworks and libraries. The myriad combinations of ML hardware and ML software make assessing ML-system performance in an architecture-neutral, representative, and reproducible manner challenging. There is a clear need for industry-wide standard ML benchmarking and evaluation criteria. MLPerf Inference answers that call. In this paper, we present our benchmarking method for evaluating ML inference systems. Driven by more than 30 organizations as well as more than 200 ML engineers and practitioners, MLPerf prescribes a set of rules and best practices to ensure comparability across systems with wildly differing architectures. The first call for submissions garnered more than 600 reproducible inference-performance measurements from 14 organizations, representing over 30 systems that showcase a wide range of capabilities. The submissions attest to the benchmark's flexibility and adaptability.