arXiv subjects

Zhun Deng

Publications and source records attributed to Zhun Deng.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Ask to Learn: Query-Based Collaborative Reinforcement Learning

Offline reinforcement learning is fundamentally limited by the coverage of the available data, while collecting additional trajectories through online exploration may be costly, unsafe, or infeasible. We study whether this limitation can be overcome without directly interacting with the underlying environment. Motivated by practical settings such as collaborator-mediated simulation, where a collaborator can provide information complementary to the offline data, we introduce query-based collaborative reinforcement learning to study how to acquire this information efficiently. The learner starts with a fixed offline dataset and adaptively queries state-time pairs; the collaborator samples an action according to a fixed, possibly suboptimal policy, and the simulator returns the corresponding reward and next state. For finite-horizon tabular problems, we derive an instance-dependent information-theoretic lower bound on the additional queries required to identify an $ε$-optimal policy and develop a local quadratic approximation. Guided by this characterization, we develop an adaptive query-allocation algorithm whose query complexity nearly matches the local benchmark under suitable conditions. Experiments on multiple synthetic and semi-synthetic environments demonstrate the empirical efficiency of the proposed method.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2026

Statistical Inference under Performativity: From Policy Feedback to Self-Evolving Systems

Performativity arises when prediction-informed decisions change the data-generating process, creating feedback between deployment and learning. This phenomenon occurs in policy-making and in self-evolving AI systems that shape their own future training data. Statistical inference is challenging because estimation errors in earlier predictors affect subsequent data distributions and propagate into later updates. We develop an end-to-end framework for statistical inference under performativity. For repeated risk minimization and repeated gradient descent, we establish central limit theorems at fixed deployment rounds and derive covariance recursions that capture both current-round sampling variation and uncertainty inherited from earlier deployments. We develop consistent covariance estimators using policy perturbations and score matching. These results can yield asymptotically valid confidence regions for population iterates and the performative stable point. We further extend prediction-powered inference to this dynamic setting, combining labeled observations with predictions on additional unlabeled data to improve statistical efficiency. We evaluate our framework in synthetic, semi-synthetic educational, and self-evolving large language model routing settings. Our experiments demonstrate that ignoring propagated uncertainty can lead to substantial undercoverage even after repeated retraining. Together, these results provide statistical tools for learning systems that help determine the distributions from which they learn. Our work establish a complete statistical inference under performativity, introducing new challenges and inference settings that we believe will provide substantial value to policy-making, statistics, and machine learning.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

OmniMechanism Design for Human-AI Collaboration with Impressionable Minds

As AI systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains such as healthcare, effectively integrating human expertise with AI outputs is critical for reliable decision-making. A substantial body of theoretical work studies optimal mechanisms for human-AI collaboration (HAC), focusing on when to involve humans and how to combine their expertise with AI predictions. However, these approaches largely overlook a key factor highlighted by empirical evidence: human judgments are impressionable and can vary depending on how AI outputs are presented. For example, when AI systems defer decisions to humans, revealing or withholding the AI prediction can significantly influence human judgments. Moreover, existing work neglects deployment-time variability, where conditions, particularly the cost of eliciting human input, may differ substantially from those observed during training. To address these challenges, we introduce a rigorous and theoretically grounded framework for human-AI collaboration, termed collaborative omnimechanism design, based on a novel and computationally efficient contextual bandit variant of boosting for outcome indistinguishability. In particular, we reduce a calibration-type outcome indistinguishability condition to weighted calibration, providing a novel time-efficiency result, bypassing the high-dimension curse induced by complicated collaboration methods and outcome space. Our framework provides a principled characterization of human impressionability and introduces a unified optimization scheme that enables robust and adaptable decision-making across diverse query costs and evaluation objectives without retraining. We evaluate the framework in three HAC settings, examining adaptation to query costs and prediction objectives without retraining, and show that its induced policies perform comparably to or better than the evaluated baselines.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Constrained Gradient Equilibrium: Approachability under Locally Constrained Adversaries

Gradient equilibrium (GEQ) is a recent framework in online learning that requires the time-averaged gradients along the learner's trajectory to vanish. We study GEQ when the learner is constrained and ask when such an equilibrium remains achievable in an adversarial environment. We first show that constrained GEQ (CGEQ) can be impossible even under simple and slowly varying constraints, motivating imposing local temporal structure on the adversary. We then develop an approachability framework for CGEQ under locally constrained adversaries, and obtain necessary and sufficient characterizations in the spirit of classical Blackwell approachability. Beyond these theoretical characterizations, we provide an algorithmic principle that converts window-wise no-regret learners into CGEQ algorithms under a local feasibility condition with margin. Experiments on synthetic and real data demonstrate that the resulting algorithms perform strongly in both achieving GEQ and respecting the constraints.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Who Should We Listen to More? Welfare-Aware Preference Acquisition for Pluralistic Alignment

Pluralistic alignment needs to accommodate diverse preferences under limited human feedback. Using AI simulators to label preference comparisons reduces annotation costs, but variation in simulation accuracy across individuals can leave some people's preferences poorly represented in training. We study how to allocate human feedback across people to construct training data for pluralistic alignment, and how this allocation affects the trained policy. To make this allocation explicit and controllable, we define a social welfare objective over individual supervision utilities that measure label quality. Each query's marginal welfare gain depends on its expected supervision improvement, the recipient's current utility, and application-designated priority. Welfare-Aware Preference Acquisition (WAPA) uses auxiliary reference models to estimate query gains and individual utilities, then selects queries by estimated marginal welfare gain while updating recipient utilities. We prove exact optimality of the acquisition algorithm for the estimated welfare objective under a fixed query budget and model predictions. Experiments on six Roleplay collections and four OpinionQA regions demonstrate improved supervision and controllable allocation tradeoffs. Policy training on four Roleplay collections improves preference prediction for both seen and unseen individuals. When prioritizing a designated group and poorly represented individuals, acquiring human labels for 20% of comparisons recovers 75-86% of the average predictive utility gap between policies trained entirely on AI-generated labels and entirely on ground-truth labels.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

AlignPoison: Conditional Targeted Poisoning of Generative Recommenders via Decoding-Aligned Prefixes

Generative recommendation models based on autoregressive decoding have been adopted as alternatives to classical ranking-based systems. While their modeling flexibility has been widely studied, their resilience to data poisoning remains largely unexplored. In this work, we ask: how susceptible are generative recommenders to conditional targeted poisoning? Under a realistic setting where an adversary can inject limited malicious interactions and query a recommendation API as a black box, our empirical study shows that generative recommenders are vulnerable: injecting fewer than 1% synthetic interactions significantly increases the likelihood of promoting malicious targets under the trigger. To characterize this vulnerability, we analyze the synthesis of malicious interactions from two perspectives: (i) decoding alignment and (ii) prefix popularity. We observe that short, context-aligned prefixes that are both common under the model's induced transition dynamics and strongly linked to a frequent trigger consistently amplify targeted promotion. Motivated by this analysis, we develop AlignPoison, a black-box framework that discovers and samples context-aligned prefixes from API outputs. We conduct experiments on benchmarks in unimodal and multimodal generative recommendation settings. Results show that these prefixes outperform competitive baselines, improving ASR lift by up to 16.3 percentage points and highlighting a decoding-dependent, context-sensitive poisoning vulnerability in generative recommendation models.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Incorporating LLM Embeddings for Variation Across the Human Genome

Recent advances in large language model (LLM) embeddings have enabled powerful representations for biological data, but most applications to date focus on gene-level information. We present one of the first systematic frameworks to generate genetic variant-level embeddings across the entire human genome. Using curated annotations from FAVOR, ClinVar, and the GWAS Catalog, we construct functional text descriptions for 8.9 billion possible variants and generated embeddings at three scales: 1.5 million HapMap3/MEGA variants, 90 million imputed UK Biobank (UKB) variants, and 9 billion all possible variants. Embeddings were produced using general purpose models including both OpenAI's text-embedding-3-large and the open-source Qwen3-Embedding-0.6B models. Baseline quality control experiments demonstrate high predictive accuracy for variant-level properties, validating the embeddings as structured representations of genomic variation. We further apply them to real-world embedding-augmented genetic risk predictions that demonstrate the performance of using LLM embeddings in polygenic risk score (PRS) style predictions over the UK Biobank cohort data. These resources, publicly available on Hugging Face, provide a foundation for advancing large-scale genomic discovery and precision medicine.

stat.AP↗

arXiv2026

Rubrics as an Attack Surface: Stealthy Preference Drift in LLM Judges

Evaluation and alignment pipelines for large language models increasingly rely on LLM-based judges, whose behavior is guided by natural-language rubrics and validated on benchmarks. We identify a previously under-recognized vulnerability in this workflow, which we term Rubric-Induced Preference Drift (RIPD). Even when rubric edits pass benchmark validation, they can still produce systematic and directional shifts in a judge's preferences on target domains. Because rubrics serve as a high-level decision interface, such drift can emerge from seemingly natural, criterion-preserving edits and remain difficult to detect through aggregate benchmark metrics or limited spot-checking. We further show this vulnerability can be exploited through rubric-based preference attacks, in which benchmark-compliant rubric edits steer judgments away from a fixed human or trusted reference on target domains, systematically inducing RIPD and reducing target-domain accuracy up to 9.5% (helpfulness) and 27.9% (harmlessness). When these judgments are used to generate preference labels for downstream post-training, the induced bias propagates through alignment pipelines and becomes internalized in trained policies. This leads to persistent and systematic drift in model behavior. Overall, our findings highlight evaluation rubrics as a sensitive and manipulable control interface, revealing a system-level alignment risk that extends beyond evaluator reliability alone. The code is available at: https://github.com/ZDCSlab/Rubrics-as-an-Attack-Surface. Warning: Certain sections may contain potentially harmful content that may not be appropriate for all readers.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

Provable Pluralistic Alignment: Multi-Party RLHF under Offline Human Feedback

Pluralistic alignment requires learning from feedback that reflects persistent and potentially conflicting stakeholder preferences while ultimately selecting a single collective policy. We study this problem in offline reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), where the party associated with each comparison is observed. Under a shared low-rank linear reward model, we jointly estimate party-specific rewards and perform pessimistic policy optimization under Nash, Utilitarian, and Egalitarian social-welfare objectives. We establish nonasymptotic bounds for party-specific reward estimation and the resulting policy suboptimality under offline coverage conditions. We further consider general pairwise preferences that need not admit a scalar reward representation and may exhibit cycles. In this setting, we construct a pessimistic von Neumann winner policy and derive corresponding performance guarantees. Under these models, our results provide a unified finite-sample solution to a central challenge in pluralistic alignment: learning from limited, heterogeneous, and potentially cyclic feedback, and producing a single policy with explicit collective-welfare guarantees. Our framework thereby makes preference aggregation an explicit and statistically analyzable design choice rather than an implicit consequence of pooling human feedback.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Operationalizing Individual Fairness via Gradient Descent and Bradley-Terry Models

Individual fairness, the notion that "similar individuals should be treated similarly," provides a strong and flexible fairness guarantee for algorithmic decision makers. However, a barrier to implementing individual fairness in practice is the difficulty of learning the similarity metric over individuals. In this work, we present an algorithm for learning a Mahalanobis similarity metric from triplet queries of the form "is individual $i$ more similar to individual $j$ or $k$?" We work in the standard Bradley-Terry model for pairwise comparisons. Our algorithm consists of a spectral initialization step followed by gradient descent. We provide extensive theoretical guarantees on our algorithm, showing that it converges quickly to the ground truth metric despite the non-convexity of the loss in our model. Because our focus is on fairness, we also show that individual fairness with respect to an estimated metric is sufficient to achieve similar fairness with respect to the true metric. We also discuss potential applications of our work to AI model tuning. Finally, we present experimental results that demonstrate the convergence of our algorithm and the fairness performance of downstream fair predictors trained on our estimated metric.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2026

Whom to Query for What: Adaptive Group Elicitation via Multi-Turn LLM Interactions

Eliciting information to reduce uncertainty about latent group-level properties from surveys and other collective assessments requires allocating limited questioning effort under real costs and missing data. Although large language models enable adaptive, multi-turn interactions in natural language, most existing elicitation methods optimize what to ask with a fixed respondent pool, and do not adapt respondent selection or leverage population structure when responses are partial or incomplete. To address this gap, we study adaptive group elicitation, a multi-round setting where an agent adaptively selects both questions and respondents under explicit query and participation budgets. We propose a theoretically grounded framework that combines (i) an LLM-based expected information gain objective for scoring candidate questions with (ii) heterogeneous graph neural network propagation that aggregates observed responses and participant attributes to impute missing responses and guide per-round respondent selection. This closed-loop procedure queries a small, informative subset of individuals while inferring population-level responses via structured similarity. Across three real-world opinion datasets, our method consistently improves population-level response prediction under constrained budgets, including a >12% relative gain on CES at a 10% respondent budget.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

PETS: A Principled Framework Towards Optimal Trajectory Allocation for Efficient Test-Time Self-Consistency

Test-time scaling can improve model performance by aggregating stochastic reasoning trajectories. However, achieving sample-efficient test-time self-consistency under a limited budget remains an open challenge. We introduce PETS (Principled and Efficient Test-TimeSelf-Consistency), which initiates a principled study of trajectory allocation through an optimization framework. Central to our approach is the self-consistency rate, a new measure defined as agreement with the infinite-budget majority vote. This formulation makes sample-efficient test-time allocation theoretically grounded and amenable to rigorous analysis. We study both offline and online settings. In the offline regime, where all questions are known in advance, we connect trajectory allocation to crowdsourcing, a classic and well-developed area, by modeling reasoning traces as workers. This perspective allows us to leverage rich existing theory, yielding theoretical guarantees and an efficient majority-voting-based allocation algorithm. In the online streaming regime, where questions arrive sequentially and allocations must be made on the fly, we propose a novel method inspired by the offline framework. Our approach adapts budgets to question difficulty while preserving strong theoretical guarantees and computational efficiency. Experiments show that PETS consistently outperforms uniform allocation. On GPQA, PETS achieves perfect self-consistency in both settings while reducing the sampling budget by up to 75% (offline) and 55% (online) relative to uniform allocation. Code is available at https://github.com/ZDCSlab/PETS.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Adversarially Robust Control of Conditional Value-at-Risk via Rockafellar-Uryasev Conformal Inference

We present an online, distribution-free framework for controlling the Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR), extending conformal tail risk control to non-stationary and adversarial environments. Unlike classical risk control methods, which rely on stationarity or linearity of expectation, our approach provides provable safety guarantees for a nonlinear tail risk functional under arbitrary data-generating processes that may drift or shift strategically over time. By leveraging deep connections between conformal tail risk control, online learning, and the variational representation of CVaR introduced by Rockafellar and Uryasev, we develop a novel procedure for online CVaR control with adversarial regret guarantees. The proposed method operates without assumptions on the underlying data-generating process, making it broadly applicable in modern high-stakes deployment settings. We prove that the realized empirical CVaR is asymptotically controlled at the target level, and that the resulting control is asymptotically tight up to a finite-sample conservatism gap. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach on portfolio risk management and toxicity mitigation for Large Language Models (LLMs), where rare but catastrophic failures dominate system risk.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Reliable and Responsible Foundation Models: A Comprehensive Survey

Foundation models, including Large Language Models (LLMs), Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), Image Generative Models (i.e, Text-to-Image Models and Image-Editing Models), and Video Generative Models, have become essential tools with broad applications across various domains such as law, medicine, education, finance, science, and beyond. As these models see increasing real-world deployment, ensuring their reliability and responsibility has become critical for academia, industry, and government. This survey addresses the reliable and responsible development of foundation models. We explore critical issues, including bias and fairness, security and privacy, uncertainty, explainability, and distribution shift. Our research also covers model limitations, such as hallucinations, as well as methods like alignment and Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content (AIGC) detection. For each area, we review the current state of the field and outline concrete future research directions. Additionally, we discuss the intersections between these areas, highlighting their connections and shared challenges. We hope our survey fosters the development of foundation models that are not only powerful but also ethical, trustworthy, reliable, and socially responsible.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Recommending Best Paper Awards for ML/AI Conferences via the Isotonic Mechanism

Machine learning and artificial intelligence conferences such as NeurIPS and ICML now regularly receive tens of thousands of submissions, posing significant challenges to maintaining the quality and consistency of the peer review process. This challenge is particularly acute for best paper awards, which are an important part of the peer review process, yet whose selection has increasingly become a subject of debate in recent years. In this paper, we introduce an author-assisted mechanism to facilitate the selection of best paper awards. Our method employs the Isotonic Mechanism for eliciting authors' assessments of their own submissions in the form of a ranking, which is subsequently utilized to adjust the raw review scores for optimal estimation of the submissions' ground-truth quality. We demonstrate that authors are incentivized to report truthfully when their utility is a convex additive function of the adjusted scores, and we validate this convexity assumption for best paper awards using publicly accessible review data of ICLR from 2019 to 2023 and NeurIPS from 2021 to 2023. Crucially, in the special case where an author has a single quota -- that is, may nominate only one paper -- we prove that truthfulness holds even when the utility function is merely nondecreasing and additive. This finding represents a substantial relaxation of the assumptions required in prior work. For practical implementation, we extend our mechanism to accommodate the common scenario of overlapping authorship. Finally, simulation results demonstrate that our mechanism significantly improves the quality of papers selected for awards.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Statistical Inference under Performativity

Performativity of predictions refers to the phenomenon where prediction-informed decisions influence the very targets they aim to predict -- a dynamic commonly observed in policy-making, social sciences, and economics. In this paper, we initiate an end-to-end framework of statistical inference under performativity. Our contributions are twofold. First, we establish a central limit theorem for estimation and inference in the performative setting, enabling standard inferential tasks such as constructing confidence intervals and conducting hypothesis tests in policy-making contexts. Second, we leverage this central limit theorem to study prediction-powered inference (PPI) under performativity. This approach yields more precise estimates and tighter confidence regions for the model parameters (i.e., policies) of interest in performative prediction. We validate the effectiveness of our framework through numerical experiments. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to establish a complete statistical inference under performativity, introducing new challenges and inference settings that we believe will provide substantial value to policy-making, statistics, and machine learning.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2025

QuEst: Enhancing Estimates of Quantile-Based Distributional Measures Using Model Predictions

As machine learning models grow increasingly competent, their predictions can supplement scarce or expensive data in various important domains. In support of this paradigm, algorithms have emerged to combine a small amount of high-fidelity observed data with a much larger set of imputed model outputs to estimate some quantity of interest. Yet current hybrid-inference tools target only means or single quantiles, limiting their applicability for many critical domains and use cases. We present QuEst, a principled framework to merge observed and imputed data to deliver point estimates and rigorous confidence intervals for a wide family of quantile-based distributional measures. QuEst covers a range of measures, from tail risk (CVaR) to population segments such as quartiles, that are central to fields such as economics, sociology, education, medicine, and more. We extend QuEst to multidimensional metrics, and introduce an additional optimization technique to further reduce variance in this and other hybrid estimators. We demonstrate the utility of our framework through experiments in economic modeling, opinion polling, and language model auto-evaluation.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Performative Risk Control: Calibrating Models for Reliable Deployment under Performativity

Calibrating blackbox machine learning models to achieve risk control is crucial to ensure reliable decision-making. A rich line of literature has been studying how to calibrate a model so that its predictions satisfy explicit finite-sample statistical guarantees under a fixed, static, and unknown data-generating distribution. However, prediction-supported decisions may influence the outcome they aim to predict, a phenomenon named performativity of predictions, which is commonly seen in social science and economics. In this paper, we introduce Performative Risk Control, a framework to calibrate models to achieve risk control under performativity with provable theoretical guarantees. Specifically, we provide an iteratively refined calibration process, where we ensure the predictions are improved and risk-controlled throughout the process. We also study different types of risk measures and choices of tail bounds. Lastly, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework by numerical experiments on the task of predicting credit default risk. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first one to study statistically rigorous risk control under performativity, which will serve as an important safeguard against a wide range of strategic manipulation in decision-making processes.

stat.ML↗