research

Research positions, ongoing work, and the software I have built.

Research

My work sits at the intersection of language model evaluation, efficient deep learning, and interpretability — three angles on the same question of whether a reported number reflects a capability you can depend on.

Research positions

Research Intern 2026 — present
University of Arizona · College of Information Science
Advisor: Prof. Haw-Shiuan Chang · Remote
Decoding Language models Numerical stability

Extending Asymptotic Probability Decoding (Chang et al., 2024) from extrapolation across model scale to extrapolation across context length.

What the work involves
  • Removing the method’s reliance on a family of same-recipe language models at multiple sizes — the requirement that makes it impractical for most model families in the wild.
  • Auditing the training pipeline against the original formulation to isolate sources of training instability: the curve-fitting objective, top-_k_ candidate selection, and the numerical conditioning of the parametric decay fit.
Undergraduate Researcher 2024 — 2026
North South University · Department of ECE
Advisor: Prof. Shafin Rahman · Dhaka, Bangladesh
Lottery Ticket Hypothesis Hyperspectral Evaluation protocols Formal languages

Three lines of work across pruning, evaluation, and benchmark construction.

Project detail
  • Sparse subnetworks in hyperspectral image classification under the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis. Iterative magnitude pruning across 3D CNN, hybrid 3D–2D CNN, and Mamba backbones, evaluated on three benchmark scenes.
  • Evaluation protocols for post-training language model assessment, separating instruction-following compliance from answer correctness across arithmetic, logical, and code-generation benchmarks.
  • Benchmark construction and automated evaluation pipelines for formal-language tasks spanning the Chomsky hierarchy.

The compliance–correctness split

Interactive

Score a small language model on a reasoning task and a single accuracy number has to answer two questions at once: did the model reason correctly, and did it return the answer in the format the grader demanded? When a model reasons well but ignores the format, strict accuracy marks it wrong — indistinguishable from a model that genuinely failed. Drag the grader’s strictness and watch the two views disagree.

Strict accuracy40%
Compliance rate55%
Correctness rate70%

Strict accuracy reads 40%, but the model actually reasons correctly 70% of the time. The gap is six responses that were right on the merits and marked wrong only for ignoring the format.

Selected software

Stack
DrukAgriLink
2025 · Agricultural coordination platform for Bhutanese smallholder farmers

A multi-role platform — farmers, buyers, coordinators, transporters — implementing a staged workflow from harvest listing through demand matching to fulfillment, with role-based access enforced by PostgreSQL row-level security. Integrates the 1,051-record Bhutanese administrative hierarchy (Dzongkhag–Gewog–Chiwog) into a cascading selector for standardized geographic entry.

Next.js TypeScript Supabase PostgreSQL Tailwind CSS
IntelliExpense
2024 · Machine learning system for personal expenditure analysis · Course project

Expense classification, budget forecasting, and spending-pattern analysis over user transaction histories.

Django scikit-learn Pandas NLTK
Nothing matches that filter.

Technical skills

Languages
PythonCC++JavaTypeScriptSQL
ML stack
PyTorchHugging Face TransformersNumPyPandasscikit-learnMatplotlib
Research infra
GitLaTeX
Web
Next.jsDjangoSupabase / PostgreSQL