Jessica Hullman

Professor at Northwestern CS, AI and visualization

Why they matter

Professor at Northwestern CS, AI and visualization with public evidence across AI research.

AI signals
2
past 30d
Sources
2
distinct domains
Discussões
1
past 30d
Latest signal
7d ago
View every signal from Jessica Hullman →
Ginni Rometty Prof @NorthwesternCS | Fellow @NU_IPR | AI, people, uncertainty, beliefs, decisions, metascience | Blog @statmodeling

Articles & links

Thoughts on metascientific consequences of AI-generated slides & ideas diluting the impression that speakers are commited to what they present. Science runs on personal attachment more than we admit. If it were a cake mix, how wouldn we add back an egg? statmodeling.stat.colum…

statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu
View on Bluesky · ♥ 26 ↻ 6 ↩ 1 · 2 from the directory shared this · 146d ago
↻ Jessica Hullman reposted
Matthew Salganik @msalganik.bsky.social

Happy to share a new working paper: "Machine Learning Models Trained on a Longitudinal Survey Dataset Poorly Predict Hundreds of Life Outcomes" arxiv.org/abs/2610.17115 You can hear Emily Cantrell present it Thursday Oct 15 at Oxford: metrics-and-models.github.io (online parti…

Machine Learning Models Trained on a Longitudinal Survey Dataset Poorly Predict Hundreds of Life Outcomes arxiv.org
AI Weekly's analysis →
  • Across 484 life outcomes drawn from the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study, the median cross-validated R² was 0.03.
  • The best-predicted outcomes topped out at R²CV of 0.63 for caregiver marital status and 0.62 for youth height in centimeters.
  • The authors trained up to 15,160 models per outcome and still found complex procedures showed little skill over a simple baseline.
Read full analysis →
View on Bluesky →

Some thoughts on the blog today on "humans are unreliable narrators too" as a common defense of AI mental-state language, and what I think it misses about the nature of reasoning or thinking or belief or intention as we understand these terms statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/202…

statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu
View on Bluesky · ♥ 21 ↻ 4 ↩ 1 · 2 from the directory shared this · 151d ago

More in paper, including an empirically-informed demo of how much info statistical significance and exact replication success provide for estimating true signal-to-noise ratio & effect direction: users.eecs.northwestern.edu/~jhullman/AI... Blog post: statmodeling.stat.columbia…

statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu
View on Bluesky · ♥ 11 ↻ 1 ↩ 1 · 2 from the directory shared this · 119d ago

I couldn't make it to #IC2S2 but Huaman Sun will be presenting our work on validation of silicon samples shortly -- if you're attending check it out! Paper: arxiv.org/pdf/2602.15785

arxiv.org
View on Bluesky · ♥ 7 ↻ 1 ↩ 0 · 82d ago

Nice post from @eytan.adar.prof on the cargo cult science of "AI-native" PhD students, who come in super productive because they perform all major parts of research with genAI. No one needs all these quick papers, and they can really hurt students down the road. eytanadar.medi…

eytanadar.medium.com
View on Bluesky · ♥ 42 ↻ 11 ↩ 2 · 4 from the directory shared this · 71d ago

More in paper, including an empirically-informed demo of how much info statistical significance and exact replication success provide for estimating true signal-to-noise ratio & effect direction: users.eecs.northwestern.edu/~jhullman/AI... Blog post: statmodeling.stat.columbia…

users.eecs.northwestern.edu
View on Bluesky · ♥ 11 ↻ 1 ↩ 1 · 2 from the directory shared this · 119d ago

Recent commentary

Using AI to support peer review seems unavoidable, but what quality checks should AI implement? We can take some lessons from metascience on the hard reward design problem that is AI review. I wrote a paper synthesizing a few points the emerging lit seems at risk of confusing. 1/

View on Bluesky · ♥ 61 ↻ 11 ↩ 5 · 119d ago

I'm getting asked to review a LOT of heavily AI-written sloppy papers. Very often from top general science journals. Most have policies to ensure author accountability. They don't seem to be working. Reviewers can incentivize better policy by temporarily creating friction. 1/

View on Bluesky · ♥ 29 ↻ 3 ↩ 2 · 41d ago

Are you a social scientist using LLMs to simulate human behavior in your work? We'd like to interview you to inform tools we're creating for LLM study planning & validation. Be ready to bring a dataset of LLM simulations you've worked with. 1hr $50 gift card. DM me if interested

View on Bluesky · ♥ 18 ↻ 8 ↩ 0 · 7d ago

My new go-to review request response, sadly: Hi, I declined your request, as the abstract is flagged 100% AI-generated by Pangram. Deciphering what claims authors intended vs originated from AI is not a good use of my time. Jessica Also have one to reply to prospective students

View on Bluesky · ♥ 22 ↻ 1 ↩ 1 · 50d ago

In Jessica Hullman's orbit

Center = Jessica Hullman. Left = members they follow (green edges). Right = members who follow them (blue edges). Top = mutual follows (orange edges, slightly larger). Drag any node to reposition; click to open that profile.

Are you Jessica Hullman? Show it.

Add the Who’s Who of AI badge to your site or bio. It links back to this profile.

Listed in AI Weekly's Who's Who of AI

Markdown: [![Listed in AI Weekly's Who's Who of AI](https://aiweekly.co/modules/custom/aiweekly_whoswho/images/whoswho-badge.svg)](https://aiweekly.co/whos-who/person/jessica-hullman)