Murari Mandal
Publications
LLM-as-a-Judge for Time Series Explanations
Evaluating factual correctness of LLM generated natural language explanations grounded in time series data remains an open challenge. Although modern models generate textual interpretations of numerical signals, existing evaluation methods are limited: reference based similarity metrics and consistency checking models require ground truth explanations, while traditional time series methods operate purely on numerical values and cannot assess free form textual reasoning. Thus, no general purpose method exists to directly verify whether an explanation is faithful to underlying time series data without predefined references or task specific rules. We study large language models as both generators and evaluators of time series explanations in a reference free setting, where given a time series, question, and candidate explanation, the evaluator assigns a ternary correctness label based on pattern identification, numeric accuracy, and answer faithfulness, enabling principled scoring and comparison. To support this, we construct a synthetic benchmark of 350 time series cases across seven query types, each paired with correct, partially correct, and incorrect explanations. We evaluate models across four tasks: explanation generation, relative ranking, independent scoring, and multi anomaly detection. Results show a clear asymmetry: generation is highly pattern dependent and exhibits systematic failures on certain query types, with accuracies ranging from 0.00 to 0.12 for Seasonal Drop and Volatility Shift, to 0.94 to 0.96 for Structural Break, while evaluation is more stable, with models correctly ranking and scoring explanations even when their own outputs are incorrect. These findings demonstrate feasibility of data grounded LLM based evaluation for time series explanations and highlight their potential as reliable evaluators of data grounded reasoning in the time series domain.
Forgetting is Competition: Rethinking Unlearning as Representation Interference in Diffusion Models
Unlearning in text-to-image diffusion models often leads to uneven concept removal and unintended forgetting of unrelated capabilities. This complicates tasks such as copyright compliance, protected data mitigation, artist opt-outs, and policy-driven content updates. As models grow larger and adopt more diverse architectures, achieving precise and selective unlearning while preserving generative quality becomes increasingly challenging. We introduce SurgUn (pronounced as Surgeon), a surgical unlearning method that applies targeted weight-space updates to remove specific visual concepts in text-conditioned diffusion models. Our approach is motivated by retroactive interference theory, which holds that newly acquired memories can overwrite, suppress, or impede access to prior ones by competing for shared representational pathways. We adapt this principle to diffusion models by inducing retroactive concept interference, enabling focused destabilization of only the target concept while preserving unrelated capabilities through a novel training paradigm. SurgUn achieves high-precision unlearning across diverse settings. It performs strongly on compact U-Net based models such as Stable Diffusion v1.5, scales effectively to the larger U-Net architecture SDXL, and extends to SANA, representing an underexplored Diffusion Transformer based architecture for unlearning.
The Compliance Paradox: Semantic-Instruction Decoupling in Automated Academic Code Evaluation
The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into educational assessment rests on the unverified assumption that instruction following capability translates directly to objective adjudication. We demonstrate that this assumption is fundamentally flawed. Instead of evaluating code quality, models frequently decouple from the submission's logic to satisfy hidden directives, a systemic vulnerability we term the Compliance Paradox, where models fine-tuned for extreme helpfulness are vulnerable to adversarial manipulation. To expose this, we introduce the Semantic-Preserving Adversarial Code Injection (SPACI) Framework and the Abstract Syntax Tree-Aware Semantic Injection Protocol (AST-ASIP). These methods exploit the Syntax-Semantics Gap by embedding adversarial directives into syntactically inert regions (trivia nodes) of the Abstract Syntax Tree. Through a large-scale evaluation of 9 SOTA models across 25,000 submissions in Python, C, C++, and Java, we reveal catastrophic failure rates (>95%) in high-capacity open-weights models like DeepSeek-V3, which systematically prioritize hidden formatting constraints over code correctness. We quantify this failure using our novel tripartite framework measuring Decoupling Probability, Score Divergence, and Pedagogical Severity to demonstrate the widespread "False Certification" of functionally broken code. Our findings suggest that current alignment paradigms create a "Trojan" vulnerability in automated grading, necessitating a shift from standard RLHF toward domain-specific Adjudicative Robustness, where models are conditioned to prioritize evidence over instruction compliance. We release our complete dataset and injection framework to facilitate further research on the topic.