PhD dissertation · defending August 2026
Answering Under UncertaintyAbstention, Ambiguity, and Revision
The dissertation addresses three places where answering breaks down: unreliable output confidence, input ambiguity relative to available evidence, and uncertainty about whether revising a draft answer with retrieved evidence will make it better or worse.
- 01 Output uncertainty
Is the current prediction reliable enough to return?
Natural reject option
Abstention when no rejection cost or coverage target is given: per-class thresholds that maximize selected accuracy while requiring the rejected region to behave like genuine confusion.
Abstain ISVC 2022 Best Paper · MVA 2025 journal extension
- 02 Input ambiguity
Does available evidence move the model toward the intended meaning?
Measuring evidence use
ImageCoMMuTE-style metrics for multimodal translation: does the correct image lower the model's uncertainty for the correct translation, relative to a misleading image? The metrics test image dependence directly instead of inferring it from aggregate scores.
Use evidence WMT 2024
- 03 Post-answer revision
Will a second look make the answer better or worse?
When revision helps
Compares a model's direct answer with its evidence-revised answer on the same questions, so routing policies can weigh the chance that revision fixes a wrong answer against the chance it breaks a right one.
Revise ARR submission in preparation