Drishti Goel

Drishti Goel, Agam Goyal, Veda Duddu et al.

Language models are increasingly being deployed for conversational support in informal caregiving contexts, where interactions often extend beyond information-seeking: caregivers seek emotional reassurance, guidance, and help, while navigating uncertain, relationally complex care decisions. Yet most safety evaluations assess model behavior under generic prompts, leaving a critical question unexamined: does a model's safety profile change with its support role? We study this by operationalizing four expert-reviewed support roles grounded in social support theory: Inform, Coach, Relate, and Listen, and comparing them against two baseline controls: a basic prompting condition and a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) condition. We evaluate across three language models (GPT-4o-mini, Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct, and MedGemma-1.5-4b-it) on 5,000 real-world queries from online Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD) communities. We find that the LLM's support role systematically shapes both the prevalence and composition of interactional risks. Furthermore, a human evaluation study reveals a perceived quality--safety tension: more directive, information-oriented roles are rated as more helpful and trustworthy despite exhibiting elevated interactional risk profiles. We release ~90,000 support role-conditioned model responses with risk annotations as an ecologically grounded resource for research on safer LLM-mediated conversational support.

Drishti Goel, Fiza Husain, Aditya Singh et al.

Incident management for large cloud services is a complex and tedious process and requires significant amount of manual efforts from on-call engineers (OCEs). OCEs typically leverage data from different stages of the software development lifecycle [SDLC] (e.g., codes, configuration, monitor data, service properties, service dependencies, trouble-shooting documents, etc.) to generate insights for detection, root causing and mitigating of incidents. Recent advancements in large language models [LLMs] (e.g., ChatGPT, GPT-4, Gemini) created opportunities to automatically generate contextual recommendations to the OCEs assisting them to quickly identify and mitigate critical issues. However, existing research typically takes a silo-ed view for solving a certain task in incident management by leveraging data from a single stage of SDLC. In this paper, we demonstrate that augmenting additional contextual data from different stages of SDLC improves the performance of two critically important and practically challenging tasks: (1) automatically generating root cause recommendations for dependency failure related incidents, and (2) identifying ontology of service monitors used for automatically detecting incidents. By leveraging 353 incident and 260 monitor dataset from Microsoft, we demonstrate that augmenting contextual information from different stages of the SDLC improves the performance over State-of-The-Art methods.

Vaibhav Ganatra, Drishti Goel

Deep learning models used for medical image classification tasks are often constrained by the limited amount of training data along with severe class imbalance. Despite these problems, models should be explainable to enable human trust in the models' decisions to ensure wider adoption in high-risk situations. In this paper, we propose PRECISe, an explainable-by-design model meticulously constructed to concurrently address all three challenges. Evaluation on 2 imbalanced medical image datasets reveals that PRECISe outperforms the current state-of-the-art methods on data efficient generalization to minority classes, achieving an accuracy of ~87% in detecting pneumonia in chest x-rays upon training on <60 images only. Additionally, a case study is presented to highlight the model's ability to produce easily interpretable predictions, reinforcing its practical utility and reliability for medical imaging tasks.

Sukrit Kumar, Drishti Goel, Thomas Zimmermann et al.

Software developers balance a variety of different tasks in a workweek, yet the allocation of time often differs from what they consider ideal. Identifying and addressing these deviations is crucial for organizations aiming to enhance the productivity and well-being of the developers. In this paper, we present the findings from a survey of 484 software developers at Microsoft, which aims to identify the key differences between how developers would like to allocate their time during an ideal workweek versus their actual workweek. Our analysis reveals significant deviations between a developer's ideal workweek and their actual workweek, with a clear correlation: as the gap between these two workweeks widens, we observe a decline in both productivity and satisfaction. By examining these deviations in specific activities, we assess their direct impact on the developers' satisfaction and productivity. Additionally, given the growing adoption of AI tools in software engineering, both in the industry and academia, we identify specific tasks and areas that could be strong candidates for automation. In this paper, we make three key contributions: 1) We quantify the impact of workweek deviations on developer productivity and satisfaction 2) We identify individual tasks that disproportionately affect satisfaction and productivity 3) We provide actual data-driven insights to guide future AI automation efforts in software engineering, aligning them with the developers' requirements and ideal workflows for maximizing their productivity and satisfaction.

Drishti Goel, Jeongah Lee, Qiuyue Joy Zhong et al.

Caregivers seeking AI-mediated support express complex needs -- information-seeking, emotional validation, and distress cues -- that warrant careful evaluation of response safety and appropriateness. Existing AI evaluation frameworks, primarily focused on general risks (toxicity, hallucinations, policy violations, etc), may not adequately capture the nuanced risks of LLM-responses in caregiving-contexts. We introduce RubRIX (Rubric-based Risk Index), a theory-driven, clinician-validated framework for evaluating risks in LLM caregiving responses. Grounded in the Elements of an Ethic of Care, RubRIX operationalizes five empirically-derived risk dimensions: Inattention, Bias & Stigma, Information Inaccuracy, Uncritical Affirmation, and Epistemic Arrogance. We evaluate six state-of-the-art LLMs on over 20,000 caregiver queries from Reddit and ALZConnected. Rubric-guided refinement consistently reduced risk-components by 45-98% after one iteration across models. This work contributes a methodological approach for developing domain-sensitive, user-centered evaluation frameworks for high-burden contexts. Our findings highlight the importance of domain-sensitive, interactional risk evaluation for the responsible deployment of LLMs in caregiving support contexts. We release benchmark datasets to enable future research on contextual risk evaluation in AI-mediated support.