Factorizable joint shift revisited

Generalization under distribution shift remains a core challenge in modern machine learning, yet existing learning bound theory is limited to narrow, idealized settings and is non-estimable from samples. In this paper, we bridge the gap between theory and practical applications. We first show that existing definition of concept shift breaks when the source and target supports mismatch. Leveraging entropic optimal transport, we propose a key notion: $\gamma^{*}\!$-concept shifts, and derive a general error bound unifying covariate and $\gamma^{*}\!$-concept shifts, which applies to broad loss functions, label spaces, and stochastic labeling. We further develop estimators for these shifts with concentration guarantees, and the DataShifts algorithm, which can quantify distribution shifts and estimate the error bound in most applications - a rigorous and general tool for analyzing learning error under distribution shift.

We propose a unified framework for addressing three key challenges of distribution shift: (1) estimating a model's performance on an unlabeled target domain, (2) explaining the shift by identifying the features responsible, and (3) improving the target domain performance. Our method, Entropic Projection Alignment (EPA), aligns the source distribution to the target by matching carefully selected moments while simultaneously minimising the KL divergence from the source. This formulation yields a unique closed-form solution for importance weights, achieving robustness through implicit variance control. Drawing on domain adaptation theory, we establish that moment matching is sufficient for reliable estimation and adaptation, avoiding the need for full density ratio recovery. Extensive experiments, together with strong theoretical guarantees, demonstrate that EPA consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines while offering substantial computational efficiency.

Conformal prediction certifies that a classifier's prediction sets cover the truth, and that certificate is marginal. Many recognition benchmarks build distribution shift into evaluation, placing disjoint conditions in the training and test splits. Under that shift the certificate stays reassuring while per class coverage fails silently: on a real cross subject skeleton benchmark marginal coverage holds near ninety percent while the worst class is covered about seventy percent and ten of sixty classes fall below eighty percent. This class specific undercoverage stays hidden behind a single reassuring marginal number. Once the shift acts jointly on covariates and labels, the target class conditional score law is unidentified, so no label free method is at once per class valid and efficient uniformly over target laws consistent with the observed source joint distribution and target covariate marginal. The per class labels needed to recover every class threshold to a given tolerance grow as the inverse square of that tolerance and the logarithm of the class count, with matching bounds for classwise threshold procedures. Pseudo labels do not shortcut it: the best prediction powered estimator gains at most a small constant factor where coverage collapses. Across three real shifts and an image corruption benchmark, source label calibration recovers much of the gap while marginal coverage holds, and stops once it breaks.