arXiv subjects

Dewen Qiao

Publications and source records attributed to Dewen Qiao.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Certified Against Which Oracle? Execution Labels Set the Reported Risk of Conformal Abstention for Text-to-SQL

A conformal abstention certificate for text-to-SQL is only as truthful as the correctness labels it is calibrated on. The uncertainty pipelines that read confidence off execution consistency take those labels from the single database a benchmark ships, an oracle known to be lenient. We run a preregistered intervention on Spider-Realistic, swapping that database for the benchmark's distilled multi-instance test suite. Across four SQL-specialist checkpoints and two split schemes, the swap raises the certificate's held-out risk 2.73 to 10.23 points above the risk its own labels report. Neither oracle reports the risk experts assign. Under blinded labels from two SQL experts, a certificate calibrated at a nominal 0.10 carries 20.0 and 17.2 points of risk on two checkpoints. The stricter oracle errs in both directions: most of the answers it rejects are not judged wrong, and some of those it accepts are. An AI-assigned census of what it rejects finds a semantic error in a quarter to a third of them, depending on the population. It attributes most of the rest to underspecified questions, synthetic instances or suspected reference-query defects, a flag supported by a preregistered blinded expert audit. The oracle also decides how a confidence score is judged. Every execution-consistency score looks better under the labels of the oracle that built its clusters, in 16 of 16 combinations. Under expert labels, building such a score on suite clusters instead of shipped-database clusters raises its area under the ROC curve (AUROC) by 6.96 points on one checkpoint and 1.53 on the other. On the second, the expert interval excludes the 8.3 points the suite labels report. A certificate should be reported with both oracles, and an oracle-relative difference read as semantic risk only after the benchmark is audited. A consistency score should be evaluated under an oracle that did not build it.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Certify or Refuse: A Cross-Model Map for Selective Risk Control with Coverage Floors under Covariate Shift

Certified selective predictors attain whatever coverage they attain; operators impose an automation floor: answer at least a $β$-fraction of shifted target traffic with at most an $α$-fraction of answers wrong. Under bounded-ratio covariate shift we prove the Floor Certification Map: once that floor must be certified alongside the selection-conditioned risk $α$, certification acquires a feasibility frontier and a two-resource complexity map, additive up to constants: risk in labeled source, the floor in unlabeled target samples. The rates are local, needing a regular frontier margin, slack below the local-regime threshold, and lattice conditions: pre-registered with a lattice margin for the upper bounds, compatible per-slack for the lower. The displayed split is the operational route; oracle weights also allow a labeled-source floor estimate. Three model-tagged results: a lower bound (Model-B), a matching oracle-weight upper bound (Model-A), and an implementable upper bound (Model-B') valid under a pre-registered exact stratified-shift model with nuisance cost priced explicitly. The match is across these models rather than a single-model minimax theorem, and necessarily so: over the full bounded-ratio class no unknown-weight procedure matches at any sample size (Model-B is inconsistent, witnessed at $α=β=1/2$). The nuisance's necessity is only partially settled. Complexity tracks a localized accepted-region functional, not global effective sample size (ESS), on both sides, though a fixed-ESS separation theorem is left open; both lower-bound axes vanish as $β\to0$, so the floor creates the map. Empirically, the registered bite family diverges with log-log slope $-2.002$ within its pre-registered band; a 1,024-cell audit records 0 violations where the formal certificates fire; and a single-corpus SQuAD-to-NewsQA feasibility audit returns honest refusal.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

FedSODA: Federated Fine-tuning of LLMs via Similarity Group Pruning and Orchestrated Distillation Alignment

Federated fine-tuning (FFT) of large language models (LLMs) has recently emerged as a promising solution to enable domain-specific adaptation while preserving data privacy. Despite its benefits, FFT on resource-constrained clients relies on the high computational and memory demands of full-model fine-tuning, which limits the potential advancement. This paper presents FedSODA, a resource-efficient FFT framework that enables clients to adapt LLMs without accessing or storing the full model. Specifically, we first propose a similarity group pruning (SGP) module, which prunes redundant layers from the full LLM while retaining the most critical layers to preserve the model performance. Moreover, we introduce an orchestrated distillation alignment (ODA) module to reduce gradient divergence between the sub-LLM and the full LLM during FFT. Through the use of the QLoRA, clients only need to deploy quantized sub-LLMs and fine-tune lightweight adapters, significantly reducing local resource requirements. We conduct extensive experiments on three open-source LLMs across a variety of downstream tasks. The experimental results demonstrate that FedSODA reduces communication overhead by an average of 70.6%, decreases storage usage by 75.6%, and improves task accuracy by 3.1%, making it highly suitable for practical FFT applications under resource constraints.

cs.LG↗