John Tribbia
John Tribbia is a Data Scientist at Google, where he drives autonomous quality systems and data-driven model improvements. A strategic thinker and research leader, John leverages behavioral data, advanced statistical modeling, and causal inference to define the future of AI feature integration.
John holds a Ph.D. in Sociology and a Certificate in Demography from the University of Colorado at Boulder, as well as a B.S. in Mathematics from the University of Puget Sound.
Authored Publications
Sort By
Preview abstract
Every team building Large Language Models (LLMs) faces a core challenge: offline benchmarks show performance gains and user engagement rises post deployment, but isolating cause from effect remains difficult. Simultaneous marketing, media coverage, and seasonal demand obscure whether model updates truly drive engagement gains. This paper presents a novel causal estimation approach that leverages non uniform quality improvements across capabilities within a single model version. Because capabilities improve unevenly (e.g., strong gains in coding versus modest gains in writing), users experience varied quality depending on their task distribution. This variation in experienced quality provides causal signal for estimation. We validate this approach on synthetic data with known ground truth. The raw estimator recovers 81% to 88% of the true effect, with the remainder lost to measurement error in usage estimates. Applying an errors in variables disattenuation adjustment (using a test retest reliability ratio mean correlation of 0.861) corrects the estimate to 1.017 (bootstrapped 95% CI: 0.915 to 1.109). By contrast, naive methods fail significantly, recovering only 63% without version controls and 62% using real time rather than frozen usage patterns. Permutation tests confirm the framework distinguishes true causal effects from noise. Sensitivity analysis indicates recovery improves monotonically from 78% to 87% as pre period length increases from 3 to 7 weeks, highlighting a clear tradeoff between sample duration and estimator precision. Seed sensitivity tests further confirm stability across random draws.
View details
