Todd Morrill

Thomas P. Zollo, Todd Morrill, Zhun Deng et al.

The recent explosion in the capabilities of large language models has led to a wave of interest in how best to prompt a model to perform a given task. While it may be tempting to simply choose a prompt based on average performance on a validation set, this can lead to a deployment where unexpectedly poor responses are generated, especially for the worst-off users. To mitigate this prospect, we propose Prompt Risk Control, a lightweight framework for selecting a prompt based on rigorous upper bounds on families of informative risk measures. We offer methods for producing bounds on a diverse set of metrics, including quantities that measure worst-case responses and disparities in generation quality across the population of users. In addition, we extend the underlying statistical bounding techniques to accommodate the possibility of distribution shifts in deployment. Experiments on applications such as open-ended chat, medical question summarization, and code generation highlight how such a framework can foster responsible deployment by reducing the risk of the worst outcomes.

Todd Morrill, Aahlad Puli, Murad Megjhani et al.

Deep mixture-of-experts models have attracted a lot of attention for survival analysis problems, particularly for their ability to cluster similar patients together. In practice, grouping often comes at the expense of key metrics such calibration error and predictive accuracy. This is due to the restrictive inductive bias that mixture-of-experts imposes, that predictions for individual patients must look like predictions for the group they're assigned to. Might we be able to discover patient group structure, where it exists, while improving calibration and predictive accuracy? In this work, we introduce several discrete-time deep mixture-of-experts (MoE) based architectures for survival analysis problems, one of which achieves all desiderata: clustering, calibration, and predictive accuracy. We show that a key differentiator between this array of MoEs is how expressive their experts are. We find that more expressive experts that tailor predictions per patient outperform experts that rely on fixed group prototypes.