Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

David G. Robinson

dblp:39/11342 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 50% Language models and text generation · 50%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-AI interaction · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness
0.912025
First-Person Fairness in Chatbots · ICLR 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model
0.912025
First-Person Fairness in Chatbots · ICLR 2025
Bioinformatics and computational biology › biostatistics › statistical bioinformatics
sequencing study design
0.212014
subSeq: Determining Appropriate Sequencing Depth Through Efficient Read Subsampling · Bioinform. 2014

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

language model as research assistant · 1.7counterfactual evaluation · 1.7saturation analysis · 0.2random subsampling · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 First-Person Fairness in Chatbots
abstract
Evaluating chatbot fairness is crucial given their rapid proliferation, yet typical chatbot tasks (e.g., resume writing, entertainment) diverge from the institutional decision-making tasks (e.g., resume screening) which have traditionally been central to discussion of algorithmic fairness. The open-ended nature and diverse use-cases of chatbots necessitate novel methods for bias assessment. This paper addresses these challenges by introducing a scalable counterfactual approach to evaluate "first-person fairness," meaning fairness toward chatbot users based on demographic characteristics. Our method employs a Language Model as a Research Assistant (LMRA) to yield quantitative measures of harmful stereotypes and qualitative analyses of demographic differences in chatbot responses. We apply this approach to assess biases in six of our language models across millions of interactions, covering sixty-six tasks in nine domains and spanning two genders and four races. Independent human annotations corroborate the LMRA-generated bias evaluations. This study represents the first large-scale fairness evaluation based on real-world chat data. We highlight that post-training reinforcement learning techniques significantly mitigate these biases. This evaluation provides a practical methodology for ongoing bias monitoring and mitigation.
Tyna Eloundou, Alex Beutel, David G. Robinson, Keren Gu, Anna-Luisa Brakman, Pamela Mishkin, Meghan Shah, Johannes Heidecke, Lilian Weng, Adam Tauman Kalai
ICLR3
2014 subSeq: Determining Appropriate Sequencing Depth Through Efficient Read Subsampling
abstract
MOTIVATION: Next-generation sequencing experiments, such as RNA-Seq, play an increasingly important role in biological research. One complication is that the power and accuracy of such experiments depend substantially on the number of reads sequenced, so it is important and challenging to determine the optimal read depth for an experiment or to verify whether one has adequate depth in an existing experiment. RESULTS: By randomly sampling lower depths from a sequencing experiment and determining where the saturation of power and accuracy occurs, one can determine what the most useful depth should be for future experiments, and furthermore, confirm whether an existing experiment had sufficient depth to justify its conclusions. We introduce the subSeq R package, which uses a novel efficient approach to perform this subsampling and to calculate informative metrics at each depth. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The subSeq R package is available at http://github.com/StoreyLab/subSeq/.
David G. Robinson, John D. Storey
Bioinform.1