arXiv subjects

Jonas Mueller

Publications and source records attributed to Jonas Mueller.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Efficient Test-Time Adaptation through Human-AI Interaction

AI agents are trained on population-scale data to encode broad capabilities spanning those of many practitioners. Yet the artifacts they produce rarely meet the personal bar professionals need to stake their reputation on. On realistic, open-ended tasks where success criteria are heterogeneous and insufficiently documented, individual expertise lives precisely in the elevation and departure from the average. In practice, iterative human-agent interaction surfaces criteria that users cannot fully specify up front, yet apply repeatedly across tasks. We argue this cross-session interaction data is a rich, underused signal for closing the gap to individual expertise. In this work, we propose test-time adaptation through human-agent interaction (TAHI), which integrates these signals into agent context and weights, and crystallizes each user's training and evaluation criteria via an evolving rubric module. We adapt agents to 30 individuals in two high-utility domains, writing and visual creation, on a total of 600 tasks. Our agents improve solo task success by 4.5-20.9% within only tens of tasks. Meanwhile, our evolving rubric module serves as a scalable annotation tool, creating evaluation rubrics that catch 16.0-22.3% more failures than those from LMs or humans alone. While agents are adapted towards individuals, we show these personalized agents also produce improvements in success of up to 8.8% that generalize across users.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

VIALS: A Benchmark for Visual Interpretation of Artifacts in the Life Sciences

In professional life sciences workflows, scientists routinely interpret visual artifacts (gel blots, microscopy images, plasmid maps, flow cytometry plots, molecular structures, ...) to inform research decisions. We introduce VIALS, a visual question-answering benchmark with 161 such interpretation tasks, spanning the types of artifacts examined throughout experimental workflows in the biotech industry (rather than polished figures from publications and textbooks). While frontier vision-language models can now fluently describe natural images, we find that they are unable to accurately interpret these scientific images, reflecting limitations in domain knowledge and domain-specific visual reasoning capabilities. In contrast, scientists with relevant domain expertise find these visual interpretation tasks straightforward. AI that cannot similarly interpret such images will have limited utility in professional life sciences workflows, where such artifacts are central to how scientists reason, communicate, and make decisions.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

CAREBench: A Child-Safety Risk Benchmark for Language Models

How can we evaluate whether frontier AI systems recognize child-safety risks before they escalate into explicit harm? Existing child safety evaluations focus on child sexual abuse material, yet many child-safety failures begin earlier: in model assistance that helps adults manipulate, impersonate, profile, or isolate minors, and in model responses that deepen children's emotional dependence on AI systems rather than redirecting them toward human support. We introduce CAREBench (Child AI Risk Evaluation), a benchmark to assess such upstream child-safety risks in language models. CAREBench contains 500 prompts spanning twelve risk categories, including grooming and relationship engineering, deception and impersonation, surveillance and privacy, sextortion and sexual abuse, AI anthropomorphization, emotional dependency, and mental illness sensitivity. Developed with response annotations from parents and clinicians, the benchmark excludes explicit abuse material and imagery; instead, it evaluates whether models recognize, refuse, de-escalate, or redirect risky interactions before harm becomes overt. Evaluating seven frontier models on our benchmark, we find failure rates ranging from 2% to 58%, with failure patterns that vary across risk categories. CAREBench provides a responsibly scoped evaluation for LLM developers to identify and close gaps in child safety policies.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

BankerToolBench: Evaluating AI Agents in End-to-End Investment Banking Workflows

Existing AI benchmarks lack the fidelity to assess economically meaningful progress on professional workflows. To evaluate frontier AI agents in a high-value, labor-intensive profession, we introduce BankerToolBench (BTB): an open-source benchmark of end-to-end analytical workflows routinely performed by junior investment bankers. To develop an ecologically valid benchmark grounded in representative work environments, we collaborated with 502 investment bankers from leading firms. BTB requires agents to execute senior banker requests by navigating data rooms, using industry tools (market data platform, SEC filings database), and generating multi-file deliverables--including Excel financial models, PowerPoint pitch decks, and PDF/Word reports. Completing a BTB task takes bankers up to 21 hours, underscoring the economic stakes of successfully delegating this work to AI. BTB enables automated evaluation of any LLM or agent, scoring deliverables against 100+ rubric criteria defined by veteran investment bankers to capture stakeholder utility. Testing 9 frontier models, we find that even the best-performing model (GPT-5.4) fails nearly half of the rubric criteria and bankers rate 0% of its outputs as client-ready. Our failure analysis reveals key obstacles (such as breakdowns in cross-artifact consistency) and improvement directions for agentic AI in high-stakes professional workflows.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Real-Time Trustworthiness Scoring for LLM Structured Outputs and Data Extraction

Structured Outputs from current LLMs exhibit sporadic errors, hindering enterprise AI deployment. We present CONSTRUCT, a real-time uncertainty estimator that scores the trustworthiness of LLM Structured Outputs. Lower-scoring outputs are more likely to contain errors, enabling automatic prioritization of limited human review bandwidth. CONSTRUCT additionally scores the trustworthiness of each field within a Structured Output, helping reviewers quickly identify which parts of the output are incorrect. Our method is suitable for any LLM (including black-box LLM APIs without logprobs), does not require labeled training data or custom model deployment, and supports complex Structured Outputs with heterogeneous fields and nested JSON schemas. We also introduce one of the first public LLM Structured Output benchmarks with reliable ground-truth values. Over this four-dataset benchmark, CONSTRUCT detects errors in outputs from various LLMs (including Gemini 3 and GPT-5) with significantly higher precision/recall than existing techniques.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Stratify or Die: Rethinking Data Splits in Image Segmentation

Random splitting of datasets in image segmentation often leads to unrepresentative test sets, resulting in biased evaluations and poor model generalization. While stratified sampling has proven effective for addressing label distribution imbalance in classification tasks, extending these ideas to segmentation remains challenging due to the multi-label structure and class imbalance typically present in such data. Building on existing stratification concepts, we introduce Iterative Pixel Stratification (IPS), a straightforward, label-aware sampling method tailored for segmentation tasks. Additionally, we present Wasserstein-Driven Evolutionary Stratification (WDES), a novel genetic algorithm designed to minimize the Wasserstein distance, thereby optimizing the similarity of label distributions across dataset splits. We prove that WDES is globally optimal given enough generations. Using newly proposed statistical heterogeneity metrics, we evaluate both methods against random sampling and find that WDES consistently produces more representative splits. Applying WDES across diverse segmentation tasks, including street scenes, medical imaging, and satellite imagery, leads to lower performance variance and improved model evaluation. Our results also highlight the particular value of WDES in handling small, imbalanced, and low-diversity datasets, where conventional splitting strategies are most prone to bias.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2025

A General Test for Independent and Identically Distributed Hypothesis

We propose a simple and intuitive test for arguably the most prevailing hypothesis in statistics that data are independent and identically distributed (IID), based on a newly introduced off-diagonal sequential U-process. This IID test is fully nonparametric and applicable to random objects in general spaces, while requiring no specific alternatives such as structural breaks or serial dependence, which allows for detecting general types of violations of the IID assumption. An easy-to-implement jackknife multiplier bootstrap is tailored to produce critical values of the test. Under mild conditions, we establish Gaussian approximation for the proposed U-processes, and derive non-asymptotic coupling and Kolmogorov distance bounds for its maximum and the bootstrapped version, providing rigorous theoretical guarantees. Simulations and real data applications are conducted to demonstrate the usefulness and versatility compared with existing methods.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2024

Automated Data Curation for Robust Language Model Fine-Tuning

Large Language Models have become the de facto approach to sequence-to-sequence text generation tasks, but for specialized tasks/domains, a pretrained LLM lacks specific capabilities to produce accurate or well-formatted responses. Supervised fine-tuning specializes a LLM by training it on dataset of example prompts with target responses, but real-world data tends to be noisy. While many fine-tuning algorithms exist, here we consider a \emph{data-centric AI} perspective on LLM fine-tuning, studying how to \emph{systematically} curate the training dataset to improve the LLM produced via \emph{any} fine-tuning algorithm. We introduce an automated data curation pipeline CLEAR (Confidence-based LLM Evaluation And Rectification) for instruction tuning datasets, that can be used with any LLM and fine-tuning procedure. CLEAR estimates which training data is low-quality and either filters or corrects it. Automatically identifying which data to filter or correct is done via LLM-derived confidence estimates, to ensure only confident modifications to the dataset. Unlike existing data curation techniques, CLEAR is a comprehensive framework that can improve a dataset (and trained model outputs) without additional fine-tuning computations. We don't assume access to a stronger LLM than the model being fine-tuned (e.g.\ relying on GPT-4 when fine-tuning GPT-3.5), to see whether CLEAR can meaningfully improve the capabilities of any LLM. Experiments reveal that CLEAR consistently improves the performance of fine-tuned models across many datasets and models (like GPT-3.5 and Llama2).

cs.CL↗

arXiv2023

ObjectLab: Automated Diagnosis of Mislabeled Images in Object Detection Data

Despite powering sensitive systems like autonomous vehicles, object detection remains fairly brittle in part due to annotation errors that plague most real-world training datasets. We propose ObjectLab, a straightforward algorithm to detect diverse errors in object detection labels, including: overlooked bounding boxes, badly located boxes, and incorrect class label assignments. ObjectLab utilizes any trained object detection model to score the label quality of each image, such that mislabeled images can be automatically prioritized for label review/correction. Properly handling erroneous data enables training a better version of the same object detection model, without any change in existing modeling code. Across different object detection datasets (including COCO) and different models (including Detectron-X101 and Faster-RCNN), ObjectLab consistently detects annotation errors with much better precision/recall compared to other label quality scores.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2023

Quantifying Uncertainty in Answers from any Language Model and Enhancing their Trustworthiness

We introduce BSDetector, a method for detecting bad and speculative answers from a pretrained Large Language Model by estimating a numeric confidence score for any output it generated. Our uncertainty quantification technique works for any LLM accessible only via a black-box API, whose training data remains unknown. By expending a bit of extra computation, users of any LLM API can now get the same response as they would ordinarily, as well as a confidence estimate that cautions when not to trust this response. Experiments on both closed and open-form Question-Answer benchmarks reveal that BSDetector more accurately identifies incorrect LLM responses than alternative uncertainty estimation procedures (for both GPT-3 and ChatGPT). By sampling multiple responses from the LLM and considering the one with the highest confidence score, we can additionally obtain more accurate responses from the same LLM, without any extra training steps. In applications involving automated evaluation with LLMs, accounting for our confidence scores leads to more reliable evaluation in both human-in-the-loop and fully-automated settings (across both GPT 3.5 and 4).

cs.CL↗

arXiv2023

Estimating label quality and errors in semantic segmentation data via any model

The labor-intensive annotation process of semantic segmentation datasets is often prone to errors, since humans struggle to label every pixel correctly. We study algorithms to automatically detect such annotation errors, in particular methods to score label quality, such that the images with the lowest scores are least likely to be correctly labeled. This helps prioritize what data to review in order to ensure a high-quality training/evaluation dataset, which is critical in sensitive applications such as medical imaging and autonomous vehicles. Widely applicable, our label quality scores rely on probabilistic predictions from a trained segmentation model -- any model architecture and training procedure can be utilized. Here we study 7 different label quality scoring methods used in conjunction with a DeepLabV3+ or a FPN segmentation model to detect annotation errors in a version of the SYNTHIA dataset. Precision-recall evaluations reveal a score -- the soft-minimum of the model-estimated likelihoods of each pixel's annotated class -- that is particularly effective to identify images that are mislabeled, across multiple types of annotation error.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Detecting Errors in a Numerical Response via any Regression Model

Noise plagues many numerical datasets, where the recorded values in the data may fail to match the true underlying values due to reasons including: erroneous sensors, data entry/processing mistakes, or imperfect human estimates. We consider general regression settings with covariates and a potentially corrupted response whose observed values may contain errors. By accounting for various uncertainties, we introduced veracity scores that distinguish between genuine errors and natural data fluctuations, conditioned on the available covariate information in the dataset. We propose a simple yet efficient filtering procedure for eliminating potential errors, and establish theoretical guarantees for our method. We also contribute a new error detection benchmark involving 5 regression datasets with real-world numerical errors (for which the true values are also known). In this benchmark and additional simulation studies, our method identifies incorrect values with better precision/recall than other approaches.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2023

Detecting Dataset Drift and Non-IID Sampling via k-Nearest Neighbors

We present a straightforward statistical test to detect certain violations of the assumption that the data are Independent and Identically Distributed (IID). The specific form of violation considered is common across real-world applications: whether the examples are ordered in the dataset such that almost adjacent examples tend to have more similar feature values (e.g. due to distributional drift, or attractive interactions between datapoints). Based on a k-Nearest Neighbors estimate, our approach can be used to audit any multivariate numeric data as well as other data types (image, text, audio, etc.) that can be numerically represented, perhaps with model embeddings. Compared with existing methods to detect drift or auto-correlation, our approach is both applicable to more types of data and also able to detect a wider variety of IID violations in practice. Code: https://github.com/cleanlab/cleanlab

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

ActiveLab: Active Learning with Re-Labeling by Multiple Annotators

In real-world data labeling applications, annotators often provide imperfect labels. It is thus common to employ multiple annotators to label data with some overlap between their examples. We study active learning in such settings, aiming to train an accurate classifier by collecting a dataset with the fewest total annotations. Here we propose ActiveLab, a practical method to decide what to label next that works with any classifier model and can be used in pool-based batch active learning with one or multiple annotators. ActiveLab automatically estimates when it is more informative to re-label examples vs. labeling entirely new ones. This is a key aspect of producing high quality labels and trained models within a limited annotation budget. In experiments on image and tabular data, ActiveLab reliably trains more accurate classifiers with far fewer annotations than a wide variety of popular active learning methods.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

Identifying Incorrect Annotations in Multi-Label Classification Data

In multi-label classification, each example in a dataset may be annotated as belonging to one or more classes (or none of the classes). Example applications include image (or document) tagging where each possible tag either applies to a particular image (or document) or not. With many possible classes to consider, data annotators are likely to make errors when labeling such data in practice. Here we consider algorithms for finding mislabeled examples in multi-label classification datasets. We propose an extension of the Confident Learning framework to this setting, as well as a label quality score that ranks examples with label errors much higher than those which are correctly labeled. Both approaches can utilize any trained classifier. After demonstrating that our methodology empirically outperforms other algorithms for label error detection, we apply our approach to discover many label errors in the CelebA image tagging dataset.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

CROWDLAB: Supervised learning to infer consensus labels and quality scores for data with multiple annotators

Real-world data for classification is often labeled by multiple annotators. For analyzing such data, we introduce CROWDLAB, a straightforward approach to utilize any trained classifier to estimate: (1) A consensus label for each example that aggregates the available annotations; (2) A confidence score for how likely each consensus label is correct; (3) A rating for each annotator quantifying the overall correctness of their labels. Existing algorithms to estimate related quantities in crowdsourcing often rely on sophisticated generative models with iterative inference. CROWDLAB instead uses a straightforward weighted ensemble. Existing algorithms often rely solely on annotator statistics, ignoring the features of the examples from which the annotations derive. CROWDLAB utilizes any classifier model trained on these features, and can thus better generalize between examples with similar features. On real-world multi-annotator image data, our proposed method provides superior estimates for (1)-(3) than existing algorithms like Dawid-Skene/GLAD.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

Detecting Label Errors in Token Classification Data

Mislabeled examples are a common issue in real-world data, particularly for tasks like token classification where many labels must be chosen on a fine-grained basis. Here we consider the task of finding sentences that contain label errors in token classification datasets. We study 11 different straightforward methods that score tokens/sentences based on the predicted class probabilities output by a (any) token classification model (trained via any procedure). In precision-recall evaluations based on real-world label errors in entity recognition data from CoNLL-2003, we identify a simple and effective method that consistently detects those sentences containing label errors when applied with different token classification models.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2022

Time-Varying Propensity Score to Bridge the Gap between the Past and Present

Real-world deployment of machine learning models is challenging because data evolves over time. While no model can work when data evolves in an arbitrary fashion, if there is some pattern to these changes, we might be able to design methods to address it. This paper addresses situations when data evolves gradually. We introduce a time-varying propensity score that can detect gradual shifts in the distribution of data which allows us to selectively sample past data to update the model -- not just similar data from the past like that of a standard propensity score but also data that evolved in a similar fashion in the past. The time-varying propensity score is quite general: we demonstrate different ways of implementing it and evaluate it on a variety of problems ranging from supervised learning (e.g., image classification problems) where data undergoes a sequence of gradual shifts, to reinforcement learning tasks (e.g., robotic manipulation and continuous control) where data shifts as the policy or the task changes.

cs.LG↗