Conformal Policy Learning with Distribution-Free Safety Guarantees
Authors: Ying Jin, Naoki Egami
Organizations: Department of Statistics and Data Science, University of Pennsylvania · Department of Political Science & Statistics and Data Science Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Policy learning aims to determine who should be treated based on individual characteristics. In high-stakes settings such as medicine and public policy where safety is a central concern, improving the average outcomes alone may not be sufficient: decision makers may also seek to protect individuals from harm, in line with the Hippocratic principle of ``do no harm.'' In this paper, we propose \textit{conformal policy learning} (CPL), a policy learning procedure with a new distribution-free safety guarantee that controls the probability of assigning treatment to an individual who would be harmed relative to control. CPL views each treatment decision as testing a hypothesis of counterfactual harm and assigns treatment by thresholding conformal p-values. These p-values use observable proxies and selective calibration to address the challenge that the potential outcomes under comparison are never simultaneously observed. For randomized experiments, under standard exchangeability conditions, CPL provides finite-sample safety guarantee at a user-specified level, without imposing any outcome modeling assumptions. Moreover, when the outcome model is consistently estimated, CPL achieves asymptotically optimal welfare subject to the safety constraint. In observational studies, CPL with learn-then-balance weights achieves doubly robust safety guarantees. We evaluate CPL through extensive simulations and apply it to an empirical study of AI-powered interventions designed to reduce conspiracy beliefs.
An agent must try new behaviors to explore and improve. In high-stakes environments, an agent that violates safety constraints may cause harm and must be taken offline, curtailing any future interaction. Imitating old behavior is safe, but excessive conservatism discourages exploration. How much behavior change is too much? We show how to use any safe reference policy as a probabilistic regulator for any optimized but untested policy. Conformal calibration on data from the safe policy determines how aggressively the new policy can act, while provably enforcing the user's declared risk tolerance. Unlike conservative optimization methods, we do not assume the user has identified the correct model class nor tuned any hyperparameters. Unlike previous conformal methods, our theory provides finite-sample guarantees even for non-monotonic bounded loss functions, and it introduces a new policy control setting. Our experiments on applications ranging from natural language question answering to biomolecular engineering show that safe exploration is not only possible from the first moment of deployment, but can also improve performance.
Conventional treatment policies map patient covariates to a single recommended intervention in order to maximize expected clinical outcomes. Although a rich body of causal inference methods has been developed to estimate such policies, point-valued recommendations can be highly sensitive to estimation uncertainty, model specification, and finite-sample variability, while typically providing little guidance about how confident one should be in the recommended action. In this work, we propose a set-valued policy learning paradigm for the multiple-treatment setting, in which policies output a set of plausible treatments rather than a single recommendation. This formulation enables intrinsic uncertainty quantification, with the size of the predicted set reflecting the degree of decision ambiguity. We extend the learning-to-defer framework to multiple treatments via a novel \textit{greatest Lower Bound} method, and introduce \textit{conformal policy learning}, which bridges the gap between unobserved ground-truth optimal treatments and estimated optimal treatment rules. Drawing on insights from the noisy-label literature, we develop a randomness-injection approach that guarantees marginal coverage without requiring assumptions on underlying black-box optimal treatment rules. Through experiments on synthetic data and a real-world application to In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF), we demonstrate that our methods produce robust and actionable policies that naturally incorporate clinical considerations while effectively balancing performance and reliability.
Laura Fuentes-Vicente, Mathieu Even, Gaëlle Dormion +3
Conformal prediction (CP) has been used to obtain probabilistic bounds on the error between a learned dynamics model and the true but unknown system. Such CP bounds can then be embedded into robust control Lyapunov function (CLF) and control barrier function (CBF) frameworks. However, such an approach does not retain stability/safety guarantees because of the distribution shift between the closed-loop trajectory distribution under the deployed CLF/CBF policy and the trajectory distribution from which the CP bound and its guarantees were derived. To address this issue, we propose an episodic framework that iteratively updates the robust conformal CLF/CBF policy while maintaining stability/safety guarantees across episodes. We achieve this by (1) using adversarially robust conformal prediction, and (2) quantifying a distribution shift budget that allows us to control how much the model error can increase across policy updates. This distribution shift budget is derived via a closed-loop trajectory sensitivity analysis, yielding an implicit and an explicit update rule for the CP bound. We analyze convergence of our algorithm, which we demonstrate on three case studies. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first results that provide stability/safety guarantees for robust conformal CBF/CLF policies.
Omid Mirzaeedodangeh, Eliot Shekhtman, Nikolai Matni +1