Clinical language models (LMs) are increasingly applied to support clinical risk prediction from free-text notes, yet their uncertainty estimates often remain poorly calibrated and clinically unreliable. In this work, we propose Clinical Uncertainty Risk Alignment (CURA), a framework that aligns clinical LM-based risk estimates and uncertainty with both individual error likelihoods and cohort-level ambiguities. CURA first fine-tunes domain-specific clinical LMs to obtain task-adapted patient embeddings, and then performs uncertainty fine-tuning of a multi-head classifier using a bi-level uncertainty objective. Specifically, an individual-level calibration term aligns predictive uncertainty with each patient’s likelihood of error, while a cohort-aware regularizer pulls risk estimates toward event rates in their local neighborhoods in the embedding space and places extra weight on ambiguous cohorts near the decision boundary. We further show that this cohort-aware term can be interpreted as a cross-entropy loss with neighborhood-informed soft labels, providing a label-smoothing view of our method. Extensive experiments on MIMIC-IV clinical risk prediction tasks across various clinical LMs show that CURA consistently improves calibration metrics without substantially compromising discrimination. Further analysis illustrates that CURA reduces overconfident false reassurance and yields more trustworthy uncertainty estimates for downstream clinical decision support.

Sentiment analysis in policy-related studies typically involves annotating a subset of data to fine-tune a pre-trained model, which is subsequently used to classify sentiments in the remaining unlabeled texts, enabling policy researchers to analyze sentiments in novel policy contexts under resource constraints. We argue that existing methods fail to adequately capture the temporal volatility inherent in policy-related sentiments, which are subject to external shocks and evolving discourse of opinions. We propose methods accounting for the temporal dynamics of policy-related texts. Specifically, we propose leveraging continuous time-series clustering to select data points for annotation based on temporal trends and subsequently apply model merging techniques - each fine-tuned separately on data from distinct time intervals. Our results indicate that continuous time-series clustering followed by fine-tuning a single unified model achieves superior performance, outperforming existing methods by an average F1-score of 2.71%. This suggests that language models can generalize to temporally sensitive texts when provided with temporally representative samples. Nevertheless, merging multiple time-specific models - particularly via greedy soup and TIES - achieves competitive performance, suggesting practical applications in dynamically evolving policy scenarios.