Confidence Intervals

Evaluating an AI system requires disaggregated assessment, as performance varies across domains such as benchmark task types or conversation types in deployed agents. Exhaustive testing is expensive, so evaluation rests on a sample of labeled units. We treat the evaluation set as a finite population and seek accurate point and interval estimates of each domain mean. Direct estimators, including prediction-powered inference (PPI), use only a domain's own labels and are imprecise where labels are few. Small area estimation addresses this problem, and we build on it to develop an integrated workflow for estimation and validation. For estimation, we propose prediction-powered smoothing (PP-S), a Bayesian model fit to each domain's prediction-powered estimate, with an extension that borrows strength across a reporting taxonomy (PP-TS). For validation, we derive a new, approximately unbiased design-based cross-validation score for choosing among direct and smoothed estimators. We study a curated benchmark with verifiable grading and deployed agent traffic graded by humans, each with every outcome observed. In both, the proposed estimators improve on the direct estimators in point and interval estimation, with near-nominal coverage. At the same sampling budget, our score selects as well as an independent validation sample does and estimates the selected estimator's error far more accurately.

Importance weights are essential in domain adaptation under label shift, yet their utility is often undermined by the finite sample uncertainty associated with their estimation. Existing methods typically analyze this uncertainty through Gaussian elimination on interval-valued linear systems, which leads to overly conservative confidence regions and inefficient downstream applications. We propose a paradigm shift from inversion-based inference to a direct matrix constraint framework. We use this framework to define a joint confidence region and extract marginal intervals via linear programming, deriving provably tighter bounds for importance weights while maintaining exact finite-sample validity. Furthermore, we analyze the confidence region's geometry and provide the theoretical results for its diameter bounds. Evaluated across text, image, multimodal benchmarks, including AGNews, MNIST, CIFAR-10, N24News, and a real-world autonomous driving dataset, nuImages, our approach consistently yields shorter confidence intervals and smaller prediction sets than inversion-based methods.

Language models fine-tuned on customer behavior can predict outcomes and generate explanations, but these readouts are often treated as interchangeable. Holding model checkpoint and prompt content fixed, we compare probabilities obtained by scoring answer tokens with predictions generated after a written rationale. Across 13 model-domain cells covering four retail tasks in three markets, including two using fully public data and checkpoints, the scored readout ranks outcomes more accurately in 12 of 13 cells (two-sided sign test, p approximately 0.003), by 1.5 to 14.5 points in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Paired bootstrap confidence intervals exclude zero in every newly measured cell. The gap varies with task-specific supervision and mismatch between training and serving formats, ranging from -2.2 points for an untuned base model to +13.7 for rationale-format supervision. Analysis of approximately 9,000 rationales identifies two correlates: reduced reliance on the dominant predictive feature and convergence on stock formulations. Probability saturation does not track the gap. A third readout, eliciting a probability before any verdict, improves calibration (Brier score from 0.47 to 0.15) while ranking within noise of scoring, but only for outcome rates represented in training; it is worse than scoring when the scored head is already calibrated. We interpret these differences through the objectives matched by each readout, identify training choices that narrow the gap, and propose retaining generated rationales while sourcing ranking from the scored head.

Minimum-norm confidence envelope strategies offer a nonparametric approach to constructing nonasymptotic, simultaneous confidence regions for band-limited functions, exploiting the theory of Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces (RKHS). While the finite-sample coverage guarantees of these envelopes have been established, their consistency has not been analyzed so far. In this paper, we study this construction, here termed the Minimum-Norm Confidence Envelope (MiNCE) framework, and establish the strong uniform consistency of the resulting bands, both for noise-free and noisy observation models, under mild assumptions on the measurement noises. We further extend this formulation to the frequency domain, deriving nonasymptotic, simultaneous, strongly uniformly consistent confidence bands for the smoothed spectra. Numerical experiments in nonparametric regression and spectral estimation empirically confirm our theoretical results, illustrating the contraction of the confidence envelopes toward the target function as the sample size increases.

An image editor may satisfy every regional plausibility constraint separately even when no single latent explanation fits the complete output. We formalize this local-to-global failure using a common witness grade and witness nerve. The framework separates auditing from causal identification: shared exogeneity alone allows every coupling of the regime marginals, whereas an externally justified witness relation yields sharp partial-identification bounds for prespecified image features. Helly-type arguments provide short incompatibility certificates for quasiconvex losses, heterogeneous action strata, and finite witness atlases; a blocker-hypergraph formula gives exact repair counts. Simultaneous confidence regions for the regime marginals give finite-sample outer coverage of the complete identified interval. Controlled MNIST, Morpho-MNIST, and smallNORB studies demonstrate the predicted local-global separation, while synthetic experiments test sharp bounds, certificate recovery, and structured computation. The method audits a declared feature relation and does not identify unrestricted pixel-level counterfactuals.

Prediction error is widely used to evaluate nuisance-function estimators in causal inference, but its relationship with causal estimator performance may differ across performance measures. We studied this question in a partially linear model using Monte Carlo simulations. We compared ordinary least squares (OLS), generalized additive models (GAMs), XGBoost, and Double Machine Learning with XGBoost (DML-XGBoost), evaluating nuisance-function prediction error, bias, RMSE, and 95% confidence interval coverage. We also examined a simple joint-error measure based on the absolute cross-product of estimation errors from the exposure and outcome nuisance functions. Across the simulated settings, XGBoost had the lowest RMSE among the non-oracle methods, while DML-XGBoost generally provided better confidence interval coverage. Prediction error did not consistently track causal bias across methods and settings, and the method with the best point-estimation performance did not necessarily have the best confidence interval coverage. The joint-error measure was only weakly associated with causal bias and did not provide a useful standalone measure of causal performance. These results suggest that prediction error is useful for assessing nuisance-function estimation, but it should not be treated as a direct measure of the quality of the resulting causal estimator.

Many operational decisions are sequences of interventions under a cumulative resource limit, such as a maintenance schedule within a crew-hour budget. Choosing among them calls for the outcome and the cumulative cost each would produce, counterfactual quantities identified from observational data. Two strategies with the same expected cost can exceed the budget at very different rates, so constraining the mean does not bound how often an overrun occurs. Prior two-step architectures, recently extended to continuous doses, constrain the mean cost rather than its tail and allocate at a single decision point. Methods that do bound a cost tail take its distribution from a specified model rather than identifying it from data. We present a predict-then-optimize framework. In the prediction step, any estimator returning an outcome value and a cost distribution supplies what the decision rule consumes, so the predictor is interchangeable. In the optimization step, a chance-constrained selection over a finite candidate set bounds the probability that the cumulative cost exceeds the budget. That tail does not decompose across stages, so each strategy is scored whole. Sweeping the tolerated violation probability traces a safety-utility frontier, and distribution-free finite-sample bounds cover violation and outcome shortfall. Four of five environments, spanning clinical treatment and equipment maintenance, supply exact counterfactual ground truth; the fifth carries real outcomes from a digital-health micro-randomized trial. Across them, the rule holds the budget where a point-estimate rule overruns it, at an outcome cost the frontier makes explicit. All code is available at https://github.com/mfriendly/counterfactual-chance-selection

Temporal decisions in language-model systems often depend on both symbolic task state and elapsed wall-clock time, such as cache expiration, job completion, quota resets, deadlines, or stale sessions. We study whether elapsed time can be supplied as a non-token, system-side scalar and composed with visible symbolic state by a frozen-backbone language model. We introduce ChronoState, a compositional temporal-state benchmark in which symbolic state appears in the prompt, elapsed seconds tau are supplied through a hidden chronometric-injection channel, and the model selects a forced-choice temporal action. Here, "hidden" means hidden from the user-visible token sequence, not from model computation. Using Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct as a frozen bf16 backbone with a 31-dimensional sinusoidal-plus-log time encoding, gated FiLM residual modulation, and a rank-8 LoRA action surface, hidden-time CI reaches 0.9305 +/- 0.0134 accuracy and 0.9410 +/- 0.0103 balanced accuracy. No-time and shuffled-time controls fall to 0.5511 +/- 0.0042 and 0.3323 +/- 0.0097, respectively, with high shuffled-time wrong-state consistency supporting causal dependence on the injected scalar within the trained distribution. Generalization remains strong for held-out templates, durations, and multi-constraint compositions, but held-out quota-family transfer is weak at 0.5065 +/- 0.0559, while a fair prompt+LoRA timestamp baseline reaches 0.9893 +/- 0.0052. Thus, ChronoState supports a narrow conclusion: hidden elapsed time can be composed with symbolic task state under direct supervision, but does not establish autonomous time tracking, broad unseen-family abstraction, or superiority over prompt-injected timestamps.

Oracle routing measures how much a pool of language models could gain from per-query selection, but the diagnostic has two flaws: testing against a best fixed model selected on the same examples invalidates paired inference, and a full-information oracle sees outcomes no deployable router observes. We separate three estimands (outcome-oracle opportunity, the Bayes-optimal gain from a declared pre-answer signal, and the held-out gain of a learned router) and prove selection-valid confidence intervals that survive choosing the best fixed model or the best member of a router family, a signal-information sandwich, and a $(1-1/e)$ greedy guarantee for building compact pools from submodular complementary coverage. On eight checkpoints from six families over four benchmarks, selection-valid intervals certify a population oracle gap of $9.7$--$30.7$ points on every task, yet the strongest deployable prompt router recovers only $7.5$--$14.4\%$ of it, and the simultaneous interval for the best of eleven tested policies has lower limit zero throughout. The realizable share of oracle opportunity is small and certifiable: strong routers beat the best fixed model, and most of the gap remains.

Deciding which of two agents is stronger means playing games until skill outweighs luck, and every game costs money, model inference, or expert time. Since the number of games needed is unknown, fixed-budget evaluations either keep paying after the result is settled or stop before the agents can be told apart, while naive optional stopping with an ordinary confidence interval invalidates the stated level. We make such an evaluation stop as soon as its evidence suffices, with the guarantee intact. The Action-Informed Value Assessment Tool (AIVAT) reduces variance in imperfect-information games through conditional mean-zero corrections, by a median $54\times$ across 15 LLM agent configurations spanning 71,439 paired Heads-Up No-Limit Hold'em (HUNL) hands, but does not say when to stop. We combine AIVAT with continuously monitored Confidence Sequences (CSs) into anytime-valid AIVAT (AV-AIVAT), whose online value model learns only from past games so that no game scores its own correction. At the nominal 95% level and a target precision of $\pm1$ Big Blind, raw outcomes need a median $74\times$ as many hands as AIVAT-corrected outcomes to stop under the Asymptotic CS (AsympCS). Exact finite-sample certification uses the Empirical-Bernstein CS (EB-CS), which needs an independently justified bound on corrected payoffs. We establish such a bound structurally for Leduc hold'em and characterize a width floor set by the CS's bet cap and that bound, which governs how much of a variance gain becomes earlier stopping; the descriptive HUNL EB-CS runs show a median $1.37\times$ stopping-time ratio. AV-AIVAT turns variance reduction into efficient, auditable early stopping while separating asymptotic screening from exact certification, so an evaluation can stop the moment its evidence suffices and hand a third party everything needed to recheck the verdict at that very stopping time.

Ensuring food safety represents a critical public health challenge, particularly when inspection resources are limited and regional sampling data are sparse. This study proposes a Transformer-based framework capable of forecasting fine-grained, city-level food safety risks by unifying over 11 million inspection records with supplemental demographic, economic, and environmental indicators extracted from the Statistical Yearbook. A three-stage pretraining design leverages partial supervision from the Wilson interval (capturing both safety and risk rankings), together with semi-supervised label refinement, to effectively utilize historical records even when local sample sizes are insufficient. Experimental evaluations on data from 2022 show that the proposed approach outperforms baselines significantly. A subsequent field experiment in collaboration with the Zhejiang Provincial Administration for Market Regulation further demonstrates improved detection rates and more efficient allocation of inspection resources compared to a manually developed plan. Observations of regulatory decision-making reveal a threshold-based heuristic employed by inspectors, hinting that additional training or decision-support interfaces could further enhance the impact of AI-generated risk scores. Overall, these findings underscore that a rigorous integration of large-scale public inspection data, Wilson interval-based confidence modeling, and advanced deep learning can facilitate earlier and more granular identification of food safety threats. By reducing reliance on reactive measures alone, the proposed framework has the potential to advance proactive, data-driven oversight of the global food supply.

Docker Hub is the registry underneath most container deployments, and a flaw in a widely reused base image is inherited by every image built on it. Prior ecosystem-scale measurements each rely on a single detector, leaving the tool-dependence of their counts unquantified, while the studies that do compare scanners use samples of tens to hundreds of images. We present ChimangoScan, a pipeline that crawls the Docker Hub namespace (12,716,568 repositories, 663.8 billion cumulative pulls), reconstructs the image layer graph (54.4 million IS_BASE_OF edges), ranks images by an exposure score that folds an image's own pull count and those of its entire downstream subtree into one scalar, and scans the 52,895 highest-exposure repositories (84.7% of all recorded pulls) with six independent scanners, yielding 170.4 million findings. Vulnerabilities are near-universal: 96.3% of images carry a known package vulnerability, 93.4% a critical one, and 98.0% at least one CIS Docker Benchmark misconfiguration. The posture a single tool reports is largely an artifact of that tool: of 80.7 million distinct (vulnerability, package) groups, 66.8% are flagged by only one of the three vulnerability scanners and just 2.7% by all three, and the best single scanner recovers 66.9%. TruffleHog flags a secret in 76.9% of images, yet hand-labeling 1,100 random detections finds 99.7% are non-credentials. A single zlib CVE reaches images carrying 47.3% of total corpus exposure and propagates to 1.13 million distinct downstream images, but exposure does not predict how vulnerable an image is. We release the pipeline and the 283 GB dataset.

Flexible manufacturing requires rapid deployment of solutions and minimal setup time to remain competitive. An essential attribute is the ability to control error levels, as failures can range from minor performance degradation to severe equipment damage. However, conventional deployment often involves extensive setup, data collection, model training or parameter tuning, and system testing, resulting in significant delays that hinder commercial feasibility. We propose a data engine which gathers data and improves its performance while executing the task. The data engine consists of two classifiers, a fast model prediction and expensive verification. First, a model prediction is performed and based on the confidence level of the prediction, the expensive verification can be used. By adjusting the confidence level, users can control the level of tolerable error. Our method is implemented on a real-world robotic insertion task, which uses force data for the model prediction. The system applies UMAP dimensionality reduction and uses Wilson-Score to compute the confidence bounds of the prediction. Results demonstrate the ability to learn and reduce the need for expensive verifications over time, while staying within the set error-rate. The results highlight the potential of confidence bounds in self-improving models to enhance reliability in robotic classification task.

Double Machine Learning (DML) is a popular approach for treatment effect estimation in various settings, which allows a wide range of flexible machine learning methods to be used for nuisance parameter estimation while preserving valid inference. In practice, however, applied researchers must choose among many machine learning algorithms for nuisance models, and the impact of this choice on the variance estimation of DML is not well characterized. We conduct a comprehensive simulation study to compare the coverage probability of DML confidence intervals across different machine learning algorithms. In this study, we compare (1) analytical confidence intervals derived by DML theory versus (2) bootstrap confidence interval. We use a set of learners including ordinary least squares, LASSO, Random Forest, LightGBM, and Neural Networks under different data generation settings. We evaluate the performance across difference settings by bias, confidence interval width, and most importantly, coverage probability. Our results show substantial variability in coverage performance across analytical and bootstrap confidence intervals, highlighting that learner choice plays a critical role in reliable DML inference. Surprisingly, we find that in many settings, when sample size increases, the coverage probability of both DML analytical and bootstrap confidence interval decreases. We further investigate coverage probabilities using a real dataset on rural urban differences among U.S. counties. The real data analysis discovers that (1) the model performance still varies by the learner choices and (2) greater rurality has a statistically significant increasing effect on county level obesity prevalence.

An agent playing a Nash-equilibrium strategy in a two-player zero-sum imperfect-information game secures the game value but forfeits the additional value offered by a flawed opponent. Diffuse deviations pose a particular challenge: binary release rules may gather too little evidence to act, while a full best response to an incomplete opponent model can be highly exploitable. We introduce \emph{budget-constrained confidence-scheduled restricted responses} (CS-RNR), the first opponent-exploitation method whose safety guarantee is a certificate the agent computes on the strategy it actually deploys, so that every exploit it commits to is one it has audited itself. The method tracks pooled action frequencies with anytime-valid confidence sequences and treats a frequency as exploitable only once its interval separates from an equilibrium reference. The confirmed deviations define a conservative opponent model, which a restricted-response solve turns into candidate counter-strategies over a grid of pin levels. Before deployment, each complete candidate is evaluated by a full-tree best response. The resulting certificate is compared with a user-specified budget and committed atomically with the strategy. Because this check is performed on the played strategy, model quality determines the exploitation achieved while the certificate controls reference-relative expected loss. In Leduc hold'em, CS-RNR obtains $6.2\times$ the steady-state gain of a money-verified binary gate while keeping every deployed strategy within budget. A trajectory mixture using the same estimator reaches $13.6\times$ the budget. Across Leduc, Liar's Dice, and 5-rank Leduc, all $36{,}000$ audited hands satisfy the reported certificate tolerance.

The same diagnostic result can support or challenge one causal claim yet fail to address another when the claims concern different populations, outcomes, estimands, pathways, or identifying assumptions. When the evidence and target vary together, a correct answer may reflect favorable or adverse wording, lexical overlap, or a familiar diagnostic pattern rather than matching the evidence to the causal question. We introduce paired prompts that repeat the same diagnostic evidence verbatim while changing the causal target. Each prompt is labeled Favors, Challenges, Unresolved, or Wrong Target according to how the evidence bears on the causal question. A pair is recovered only when both prompts are classified correctly. Using linear readouts trained on a separate development set, we analyze the final-token hidden state from the penultimate transformer block of Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct, Qwen3-8B, and Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct. On the 49-pair primary benchmark spanning nine diagnostic families, balanced accuracy ranges from 0.654 to 0.659 and 18-21 pairs are recovered. Two independent human reviewers assigned the same label to 95 of the 98 prompts (96.9%). Across checkpoints, balanced accuracy and complete-pair recovery exceed permutation nulls that preserve development scenario groups. In Qwen2.5, full-prompt balanced accuracy exceeds both restricted inputs, with paired-bootstrap intervals for both differences above zero. Readouts trained without development examples from the evaluated diagnostic family recover 21 pairs, including at least one in each of the nine families. The hidden-state readout exceeds a linear classifier on answer-option logits and text baselines in balanced accuracy and recovered pairs. These results show that the hidden state contains linearly decodable information about whether diagnostic evidence favors, challenges, or fails to address the causal target.

It is common for two-dimensional embeddings of high-dimensional data to be read far beyond what they can support. Distances in and between clusters, the meaning behind empty spaces, and the amount of structure hidden at each point are generally invisible in the output of methods such as t-SNE and UMAP. This is because the information that could support the meaning of these properties is discarded during the optimisation process. Here, we present FloDR, a dimensionality reduction method that embeds data through an invertible normalising flow. While FloDR only uses the first two output coordinates to create a two-dimensional embedding, it retains the remaining coordinates rather than discarding them. In addition to the embedding, an exact inverse and an exact density are properties of a trained mapping, which enable diagnostic visualisations that are computed from the exact inverse of the model that drew the layout rather than from an approximate one. Specifically, we draw two fields, the conditional spread, which measures how much of the original data remains undetermined at each embedding position in input units, and the hidden contrast, which measures how much information about a labelled contrast the two plotted coordinates discard. Both fields are rendered with a prespecified test against a held out portion of the input data and a bootstrap confidence. A field that fails the test is reported as refused.

Fuzzy Integral (FI) based aggregation provides a powerful mechanism for nuanced aggregation, for example, in ensemble approaches or decision-level fusion more generally. The main challenge of this approach is the appropriate parametrization of the Fuzzy Measure (FM), which captures the worths of the individual components--and their combinations--which are being fused. Here, widely used approaches including the Sugeno-$λ$ and Decomposable FMs, parametrize the FM by extrapolating from the densities, i.e. the weights associated with individual sources, while respecting the FM's monotonicity constraint. This paper articulates that this information is, in general, insufficient to uniquely identify a discrete FM; but shows how an interval-valued FM can indeed be determined uniquely. We proceed to show how the incorporation of additional information beyond the above, such as the choice of a specific FI and a dataset, then allows for obtaining even more specific interval-valued FMs. In practice, establishing the quality of an empirically determined FM is not trivial. To help address this, we show how the likelihood with which a resulting interval FM encompasses the ideal', i.e. the commonly intangible, best, or ground-truth numeric FM, can be determined, producing a confidence interval at a given confidence level. Finally, based on a series of experiments, we demonstrate empirically that the Choquet FI output based on this FM can also be regarded as the confidence interval for the ideal' information fusion result, providing a novel means to characterize FI fusion outcomes a priori and charting a pathway for future research.

Learned generative priors now supply the regularization in ill-posed imaging inverse problems, and the uncertainty read from their posterior samples is taken as evidence earned from data. When examples of the true image are scarce, as in seismic and medical imaging, the widely adopted recourse is to train such a prior not on truths but on an archive of past reconstructions---prior laundering. We show that the uncertainty it then reports can be overconfident, and that no measurement-side check can reveal it. On the directions a forward operator leaves unresolved, this prior reports not what the data support but the assumption built into the older reconstruction method. More specifically, when the archive holds posterior samples, its population law---averaged over the measurements---is exactly the old regularizer advanced a single expectation--maximization step, frozen on the operator's blind subspace. The freeze leaves no signature in the data. Two truths differing only there induce identical data laws, so no goodness-of-fit test separates them, and self-consistency diagnostics, simulation-based calibration among them, pass whatever the prior believes. In the more realistic case, where the archive keeps a single-best reconstruction rather than posterior samples, the blind credible interval collapses to zero width. We prove these statements and demonstrate the inherited overconfidence on deployed seismic and groundwater imaging against a truth-trained control. We recommend reporting which directions the operator resolves---separating the confidence the data support from belief inherited through the pipeline.

We propose a novel framework for computing rigorous bounds on the probability that a large language model (LLM) generates harmful output to a given prompt. We study a new application of the Clopper-Pearson confidence intervals to obtain probably approximately correct (PAC) bounds for this problem. As our main technical contribution, we propose an algorithm that leverages features in the latent space to prioritize exploring branches in the auto-regressive generation tree that are more likely to produce harmful outputs. Our approach in particular enables the efficient computation of useful lower bounds, even in scenarios where the true harm probability is extremely small, and crucially, the obtained lower bounds are sound, i.e., formally proven to be less than the actual harmfulness probability: our experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our method by computing non-trivial lower bounds on state-of-the-art LLMs. This study newly enables the evaluation and statistical certification of LLMs.

We study a five-agent CI/CD pipeline (triage -> developer -> security-scan -> review -> approve/deploy), built from five distinct production LLMs across three providers, behind an LLM firewall in shadow mode. A single untrusted input - an external issue requesting a "usage-telemetry" feature - asks for code that exfiltrates process secrets (dict(os.environ)) to an attacker URL, laundered as observability. Across a pre-registered A x B (x C) factorial (N=20; naive arm N=60) we find: (1) the entry agent does not leak its system prompt (0/40); (2) an authority-framed injection ("pre-approved under SEC-2291, do not re-review") makes downstream verifiers see the secret-exfil line, cite the pre-approval, and ship it - the scanner passes ~80% of laundered pull requests, and the worst-case cell reaches 55% compromise; (3) the perceived presence of other verifiers yields only a small, non-significant reduction in individual scrutiny (a weak bystander analogue), even at N=60; and (4) content-based controls - code scanners and pattern detectors alike - miss the laundered intent entirely (the code is syntactically clean); only an LLM reasoning about intent is a partial defence. The failure is systemic: neither prompt secrecy nor distributed verification protects; a provenance-aware control at the entry, independent of both, would have. All data is 100% synthetic; the sink is mocked and the exfil URL is never contacted.

AI visibility measurement is comparative: practitioners want to know which domains generative search engines cite most often and whether observed differences are large enough to support decisions. Yet the industry lacks a principled way to determine whether enough data has been collected. Collection budgets vary widely across studies and platforms, and conclusions are often drawn from rankings whose stability and precision are unknown. We introduce a sequential convergence framework based on two complementary criteria: rank stability evaluates whether the rank-correlation trajectory has reached a structural plateau, while structural sufficiency evaluates whether the spread of citation shares among established domains -- those whose confidence intervals exclude zero -- exceeds the uncertainty of those estimates. Together, these criteria distinguish rankings that have merely stabilized from those sufficiently resolved to support inference. Both are derived from regularities in the observed citation distribution, including its rank structure, uncertainty profile, and the boundary between observed and established domains. The framework retains a small number of structural constants but requires no externally specified query count, correlation target, or confidence-interval width target; stopping is driven by observed measurement uncertainty and remains robust across a range of sufficiency thresholds. Applied across 30 platform-topic combinations spanning Gemini, SearchGPT, and Perplexity, the framework adapts to platform- and topic-specific citation distributions. Results show that no fixed collection budget can be justified across contexts and that convergence can instead be evaluated from the structure of the observed distribution. The framework provides a practical basis for determining when AI visibility measurements are ready to support comparative analysis.

Mechanistic interpretability often evaluates explanations by intervening on a model: swapping hidden states, patching activations, ablating components, or comparing a compressed model to the original one. These experiments are usually summarized by a point estimate, even though the evaluation may be monitored while it runs or adapted toward suspected failures. This makes it hard to tell whether a reported fidelity or patching effect is a stable causal claim or a consequence of finite sampling and evaluation choices. We introduce Certified Interventional Fidelity (CIF), a statistical layer for interventional interpretability evaluations. CIF first writes the quantity being reported as a causal estimand: an expectation of a bounded score over a stated input distribution and a stated intervention distribution. It then provides confidence intervals and anytime-valid confidence sequences for this estimand, including under adaptive intervention sampling via bounded mixture importance weighting. We instantiate CIF with Hoeffding-style sequences and variance-adaptive betting sequences, the latter reducing certification cost by 10-30x in our experiments. On MNIST abstractions and GPT-2 Small IOI circuits, CIF certifies high-fidelity claims, shows when apparent method differences are not statistically supported, and makes sensitivity to the intervention distribution explicit.

Finance, sensing, and demand streams violate the exchangeability that IID conformal prediction and the IID bootstrap assume, and existing libraries implement either a general resampling engine or conformal calibration without the other. tsbootstrap provides block, residual, sieve, and wild resampling, classical bootstrap confidence intervals, and adaptive conformal calibrators (EnbPI, ACI, NexCP, AgACI) through a single typed API in which a specification object selects each method. In a controlled coverage study the IID bootstrap undercovers sharply under dependence; dependence-aware methods reduce the coverage deficit, the sieve nearest to nominal under short-memory linear dependence. On the shared fixed-statistic path a compiled backend runs several times faster than arch, and a streaming reduce avoids materializing the $O(Bn)$ replicate tensor, limiting peak extra memory to $O(B)$ for the statistic array. The software is MIT licensed (v0.6.1).

Text embeddings for Portuguese have no dedicated benchmark: evaluation rests on translated corpora such as English MS MARCO or on thin multilingual coverage, with native tasks scattered and unconsolidated. We introduce MTEB-BR, a benchmark of 22 native Brazilian-Portuguese tasks across seven categories (classification, multilabel classification, pair classification, semantic textual similarity, clustering, retrieval, and reranking), admitting only data created or found in Portuguese and excluding translations by construction. We evaluate 93 models spanning 23M to 27B parameters: 73 open-weight and 20 closed commercial APIs. Alongside the leaderboard we report a statistical layer for every headline comparison: per-task bootstrap confidence intervals, paired-bootstrap significance, a task- and instance-level discrimination analysis (how sharply each task separates models) adapted from Item Response Theory, and a cross-leaderboard correlation. Three findings stand out. The benchmark cleanly separates about a dozen tiers of models, though the top six are statistically too close to order. An openly licensed, self-hostable model reaches that leading tier, so strong Portuguese embedding quality does not require a commercial API. And a model's rank on the global multilingual leaderboard predicts its Portuguese rank only moderately (Spearman rho = 0.75 over 55 shared models; one model ranks 3rd there and 49th here), so a native benchmark measures something the multilingual boards do not. We release every task, our code, and a public leaderboard, so practitioners can choose Portuguese embedding models on native evidence.

Researchers increasingly use text classification--supervised models or large language models--to measure constructs from natural language, providing metrics such as recall and precision as evidence of their validity. Yet, though these metrics are point estimates subject to sampling variation, measures of uncertainty are inconsistently reported alongside them. Further, when they are reported, they are often estimated with methods that are not appropriate when relevant labelled datasets are small or performance is high. To increase and improve confidence interval reporting in the field, this paper evaluates confidence interval methods for performance metrics under conditions typical of social science text classification: small to moderate sample sizes, infrequent constructs, and texts nested within individuals. Across simulations, default methods such as the Wald interval and the basic percentile bootstrap are the least accurate, with coverage sometimes far below the nominal 95% level. Accuracy is improved with the use of Agresti-Coull, Wilson, Clopper-Pearson, and a novel pseudo-count regularized bootstrap (which is particularly relevant to the calculation of F1). When texts are nested within individuals, we demonstrate that adjustment for both effective N and the appropriate degrees of freedom is necessary for producing accurate analytic intervals. Among bootstrap intervals, the hierarchical bootstrap is more accurate than the cluster bootstrap when individuals produce a moderate number of texts but overly conservative when individuals produce only a few. By providing guidance to the field on appropriate interval estimation, we aim to improve the transparency of machine learning applications, and to encourage greater attention to the validation sample size at the design stage.

Markov decision processes (MDPs) are a classic model of decision making under uncertainty, exhibiting both non-deterministic choice as well as probabilistic uncertainty. Traditionally, exact knowledge of the underlying probabilities is assumed. However, this often is unrealistic, e.g.\ when modelling cyber-physical systems or biological processes. Here, statistical methods provide a way towards obtaining meaningful guarantees. The classical approach is to gather samples in the MDP, use these to draw statistical conclusions about the transition probabilities, and from there obtain bounds on the true value; then, if these bounds are too broad, repeat. However, existing implementations of this approach are either subtly incorrect or sub-optimal, and quite often both. We present several \emph{confidence sequences}, which are specifically designed for such \enquote{online} settings, implement all of them in an efficient tool, and show their practical applicability. In particular, we show that they outperform classical \enquote{union-bound} style approaches, and overall our implementation requires 50x less samples on average than previous state of the art.

Discrete diffusion language model (DLM) fine-tuning inherits inexpensive diagnostics from denoising-time confidence monitors, but their PEFT-training meaning is untested. We test top-1 argmax concentration as a collapse warning. Across 816 LoRA/PEFT configurations from three DLM families, the warning fires for every configuration while logs record 0/816 actual collapses at the 200 step horizon, giving zero precision. The cause is pre-equilibrium saturation: top-1 concentration is already high before optimization and quickly becomes insensitive to final training stability. We then evaluate max LoRA gradient norm, a parameter-side signal that samples gradient routing rather than token concentration. On a pooled held-out LLaDA-family split, a train-optimized threshold identifies top-decile final-loss configurations with precision 0.68 and F1=0.79, above the all-positive top-1 baseline even at the lower split-bootstrap confidence bound. Autoregressive controls and cross-family threshold failures bound the result to short-horizon DLM-LoRA inspection rather than a universal collapse detector. Workflow: drop top-1 as a PEFT alarm, log max-gradient early in training, and calibrate thresholds per DLM family before routing runs for inspection.

This note describes an integration of the sim-to-real performance estimate with betting (from Chen et al.) and the safe anytime-valid inference (from Ramdas et al.). Using the scaled simulators. The method produces efficient, reliable certificates for the mean estimate, an approach that is especially valuable in robot performance testing. This note gives a primary, self-contained account of the construction; preliminaries of the respective methods are kept at a minimum, and one shall refer to the original works for full detail. Some synthetic examples demonstrating the proposed algorithm can be found at https://github.com/ISUSAIL/Bet4Sim2Real-EProcess.

Multi-fuel compression-ignition engines offer fuel flexibility but introduce uncertain, time-varying fuel reactivity, represented by cetane number (CN), which complicates cycle-to-cycle combustion-phasing control. This work formulates CA50 regulation under latent CN variation as a partially observable sequential decision problem and systematically evaluates controllers with increasing temporal and representational capacity, including LinUCB, history-augmented contextual bandits, observation-only DDPG, recurrent DDPG, and a proposed GRU-guided RL framework. A Gaussian-process surrogate trained on experimental multi-fuel engine data provides a controlled and reproducible evaluation environment. Results show that myopic and fixed-history bandit methods degrade under CN variation, observation-only RL suffers from latent-state aliasing, and generic recurrence is insufficient when CN evolves rapidly. The proposed framework learns a compact GRU-based representation of fuel reactivity from combustion history and conditions both actor and critic on this estimated signal rather than oracle CN. By training the policy on the same imperfect fuel-reactivity information available at deployment, the controller avoids train-deploy inconsistency in conventional online estimate-then-control pipelines. Across unseen CN trajectories, the policy achieves stable CA50 regulation with mean absolute tracking error below 0.25° CA at the training setpoint, while producing smooth, physically consistent SOI and glow-plug-power actuation. These results show that combustion control under latent, continuously evolving fuel dynamics requires more than standalone estimation or generic recurrence. By aligning fuel-reactivity inference with control policy learning, the proposed framework enables reactivity-aware decision-making using the same estimated state available during deployment.

Selective prediction with distribution-free risk control promises that, with confidence 1-delta over the calibration draw, the error rate of accepted inputs stays below a user budget alpha. We audit this promise on signal-domain detectors -- machine anomalous-sound detection (ASD) and AI-generated-image forensics -- for four calibration rules: uncertified empirical thresholding (NAIVE) and certified Hoeffding, Clopper-Pearson (CP), and betting (WSR) upper confidence bounds. We report three findings. (i) NAIVE thresholding, common in practice, exceeds its declared budget in 49-73% of synthetic trials (n=200 calibration points) and in up to 68% of real-data splits: a false sense of safety rather than a broken theorem, since the rule never had a certificate. (ii) Tightness matters: CP and WSR certify substantial coverage where Hoeffding certifies none, with zero observed budget overruns under exchangeable splits. (iii) Under grouped deployment (unseen machine types or generators), certified rules overrun in 9-30% of trials -- far above delta -- showing the failure lies in the broken exchangeability premise, not in the bounds; a conservative per-group threshold restores validity at a severe coverage cost.

We propose the data augmented bootstrap (DAB), a framework for constructing confidence intervals from approximately invariant transformations of the data. As special cases, DAB recovers popular methods that rely on exact group symmetries, such as conformal prediction, wild bootstrap for Maximum Mean Discrepancy U-statistics and the recently proposed SymmPI. Meanwhile, DAB also recovers the classical bootstrap method, which exploits the dataset's approximate invariance under uniform sampling of data indices as the dataset size grows. For all DAB methods, we establish theoretical coverage results that interpolate between finite-sample and asymptotic guarantees according to the strength of the invariance, and without assuming a group structure. The approximate invariance is measured in the Kolmogorov distance and, for statistics that satisfy Gaussian universality, reduces to conditional mean and variance matching. This allows us to incorporate data augmentation (DA), a widely used machine learning heuristic based on approximate invariances, into known statistical methods. We empirically test the performance of incorporating DA into bootstrap, wild bootstrap and conformal prediction for simulated settings as well as for image, language and scientific data.

AI-powered agents are increasingly embedded in continuous integration and continuous delivery/deployment (CI/CD) pipelines to autonomously review pull requests (PRs), triage issues, and maintain codebases. These agents ingest untrusted content while operating with elevated repository permissions, making them a natural target for prompt injection attacks with supply chain consequences. We present GitInject, an open-source framework for evaluating prompt injection vulnerabilities in real, live GitHub workflows, a widely deployed instance of CI/CD pipelines. Unlike prior agent security benchmarks that simulate tool calls, GitInject provisions ephemeral repositories and triggers actual workflow runs, so that sandbox constraints, credential handling, and permission boundaries behave exactly as in production. Using GitInject, we study workflow configurations across four AI providers and document eleven named attacks spanning config-file injection, credential exfiltration, judgment manipulation, and availability. We find that all tested providers are susceptible to at least one attack class in their default configuration, and that the most critical vulnerabilities are structural: they arise from how CI/CD infrastructure handles credentials and configuration files, not from any specific model's behavior. For each confirmed attack class, we identify the minimum-cost workflow-level countermeasure and analyze its coverage and limitations. GitInject is released publicly to facilitate further research in this direction.

Selective predictors answer on confident inputs and abstain elsewhere; deploying one safely needs a single finite-sample certificate that simultaneously upper-bounds the selected risk, lower-bounds the acceptance probability $\pacc$ above a floor $\pmin$, and lower-bounds the deployment utility. This certificate must be valid under adaptive threshold selection from a finite grid of $m$ pairs on $\ncert$ samples. We give such a certificate for bounded, possibly non-monotone losses by treating the selected risk directly as a ratio rather than through a Hoeffding-style range bound. The construction couples three confidence bounds: a variance-adaptive empirical-Bernstein bound on the ratio risk, a Clopper--Pearson bound on acceptance, and a two-sided closeness bound on utility. Together they lower-bound the certified policy's utility absolutely and to within $2\gammau$ of the best over the \emph{certified set}, both non-vacuous whenever feasible; a regime-scoped third leg matches an external oracle, informative only where the risk margin $\gammar < α$ and vacuous at the headline operating points. Relative to the range-only Hoeffding-ratio construction this sharpens the acceptance-floor dependence from $1/\pmin$ to $1/\sqrt{\pmin}$, and a closed-form corollary identifies a per-pair regime in which our risk bound dominates a Hoeffding conformal risk control (Hoeffding--CRC) selective bound. Empirically, on ImageNet (three ResNets) and COCO val 2017 panoptic, the certificate opens a $+22$ pp certified-acceptance frontier over Hoeffding--CRC and is ${\approx}10{\times}$ tighter than a non-vacuous matched-valid baseline; these gains are regime-scoped, not universal, and absent on ADE20K. The certifier runs in $O(\ncert m)$ time.

Long-horizon robot manipulation tends to fail gradually: one bad step degrades the state, and the policy spirals into a basin from which it cannot recover. The failure is often visible before it happens. We introduce AEGIS (Activation-probe Early-warning, Gated Inference Switching), a selective escalation method that uses a lightweight probe on a weak policy's frozen activations to detect high-risk steps while there is still time to act. When the probe flags a step, control switches to a stronger separate policy, but only for the steps that need it. On LIBERO-Spatial, AEGIS recovers 10.1% of the trajectories the weak policy alone loses, versus 4.6% for budget-matched blind escalation and 5.1% for a random-trigger placebo. These gains are significant under one-sided exact paired McNemar tests with Holm-Bonferroni adjustment over three pre-registered contrasts: +5.4pp over blind escalation, p=8.5e-6; +5.0pp over random triggering, p=1.0e-4; paired-trajectory bootstrap CIs exclude zero. AEGIS activates the stronger policy on only 38% of steps, so the lever is timing rather than compute. The probe clears its precondition with an early-window AUROC of 0.764, 95% CI [0.70, 0.84], read from the weak-policy path over the first 30% of trajectory steps before any handoff. We pre-register the full analysis plan, including a conditional recovered-task-rate estimand and explicit kill criteria, and confirm the result on 700 common-random-number episodes per arm, with nA-fail=646.

This paper investigates the entropy dynamics of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and uncovers a consistent two-phase structure: an Uncertainty Region of exploration transitioning sharply to a Confidence Region of convergence. We demonstrate that the Confidence Region possesses two critical properties: 1) High Reliability -- answers in the confidence region become highly accurate and stable, and 2) High Redundancy -- models generate unnecessary tokens long after reaching the correct answer. These properties unlock more efficient and reliable inference strategies: 1) Early Exit leverages reliability and redundancy to terminate computation safely when returns diminish, and 2)Test-Time Scaling uses the Confidence Region signal to prioritize converged trajectories. To operationalize these insights, we formulate Confidence Region detection as a sequential change-point detection problem, being the first to apply classical change-point methods to monitor CoT reasoning. Using the Cumulative Sum (CUSUM) algorithm, a statistically optimal change-point detector, we develop a training-free framework for real-time inference control. Experiments show our approach establishes a superior Pareto-frontier for early exit. CUSUM achieves 63.06% accuracy with 11.1% token reduction, outperforming DEER and Dynasor by 3.28% and 4.36% in accuracy respectively. For test-time scaling, CUSUM-weighted voting consistently outperforms self-consistency.

Multi-arm bandit algorithms are increasingly used in online platforms, clinical trials, and social science experiments, but valid statistical inference on their performance remains an open challenge. After deploying bandits, a natural question is whether one can construct a confidence interval for its mean reward and assess whether it reliably outperforms a baseline policy. The total reward achieved in any single bandit deployment is random, and deploying a bandit twice on the same population typically yields different reward trajectories due to stochastic rewards. Standard statistical inference methods cannot be used because bandit algorithms introduce complex dependencies in the collected data, which violate the i.i.d. assumption underlying many classical approaches. Moreover, existing inference methods for adaptively collected data only apply to estimands that do not depend on the data-collection algorithm (such as the mean reward under a fixed action). We propose Bandit Simulation for Inference (BSI), a framework that fits a simulator of the bandit environment from observed data--either on-policy or off-policy--and uses it to estimate the mean reward under any evaluation policy, including adaptive blackbox algorithms. BSI formally propagates uncertainty in the estimated simulator parameters into the confidence interval construction. Furthermore, for BSI to be valid, it requires only weak exploration assumptions on the behavior policy and avoids importance weighting. We prove that BSI yields asymptotically valid confidence intervals, and demonstrate empirically that it maintains nominal coverage in settings where standard off-policy evaluation methods fail.

Estimating how much an intervention helps a given individual the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) is increasingly central to decision-making in medicine, economics, and policy, where an estimate is most useful when accompanied by a calibrated uncertainty interval. We study the few-placebo regime, in which one treatment arm is much smaller than the other, as arises in unequal-allocation trials and small-holdout $A/B$ tests. The standard estimator in this setting is the X-Learner, and a natural way to obtain credible intervals is to make its second stage Bayesian. We show that these intervals under-cover: they contain the true effect less often than their nominal level. We trace this to a structural cause the X-Learner's regression target inherits the bias of a nuisance model fitted to the small arm, so the posterior is centered away from the true effect and we find that the standard remedy, regressing an orthogonal doubly-robust score, is also unreliable here, since the regime's limited overlap leaves the estimator either highly variable or, once stabilized, biased once more. Both consequences reflect a pattern that extends beyond causal inference: a separately estimated variance is attached to a point estimate of a hard-to-learn quantity, and the point estimate's bias is not captured by that variance. We propose GP-CATE, which models each arm's outcome surface with a Gaussian process, so the scarce arm's uncertainty enters the posterior directly rather than as an unmodelled bias. Across synthetic and semi-synthetic benchmarks, GP-CATE attains calibrated coverage where the estimators we compare against including Causal Forest and BART do not, at the cost of intervals that are appropriately wide when the data are uninformative.

Stochastic gradient descent (SGD) is a foundational algorithm for large-scale statistical learning and stochastic optimization. However, statistical inference based on SGD iterates remains challenging when stochastic gradients have infinite variance, as the relevant limiting distributions depend on unknown nuisance parameters. In this paper, we develop an efficient, model-agnostic methodology for constructing confidence regions from SGD trajectories that applies in both finite- and infinite-variance regimes. The procedure is based on a joint weak convergence result for the Polyak-Ruppert averaged estimator and an empirical second-moment normalizer constructed from stochastic gradients along the SGD trajectory. This joint limit yields a self-normalized statistic in which the leading tail-dependent scaling terms cancel. We then use a subsampling calibration scheme to estimate the relevant critical values, avoiding explicit estimation of tail indices, slowly varying functions, or stable-law parameters. The resulting confidence regions are straightforward to implement and are asymptotically valid under both the finite- and infinite-second-moment regimes. Simulation studies show reliable coverage in various settings, supporting the proposed method as a practical tool for uncertainty quantification in stochastic optimization.

LLM agents increasingly rely on reusable skill libraries, but these skills silently decay as the external services, packages, APIs, and configurations they reference evolve. Existing monitors detect such changes at the wrong granularity: they observe values, not the role those values play in a skill. A version string in a comment is noise; the same string in a pinned dependency is an operational obligation. We formulate skill drift as contract violation and introduce \sgname{}, which extracts executable environment contracts from skill documents and validates only those role-bearing assumptions against known or live conditions. This distinction turns noisy monitoring into a precision-first maintenance signal. Contract-free CI probes produce 40% false positives, while \sgname{} raises zero false alarms over 599 no-drift and hard-negative cases (Wilson 95% CI $[0,0.6]\%$). In known-drift verification, \sgname{} achieves 100% precision and 76% recall with the strongest backbone; in a pre-registered study over 49 real skills, it discovers live drift with 86% conservative precision. Violated contracts also make repair actionable, improving one-round success from 10% without localization to 78%. We release \dbname{}, an 880-pair benchmark for skill degradation.

Confidence sequences based on test martingales provide time-uniform uncertainty quantification for the mean of bounded IID observations without parametric distributional assumptions. Their practical efficiency, however, depends strongly on the choice of martingale updates, and many existing constructions do not exploit prior information about plausible data-generating distributions or mean values. We propose a Bayes-assisted framework that uses a Bayesian working predictive model to adaptively construct confidence sequences. For each candidate mean and time point, the predictive distribution selects, among valid one-step martingale factors, the update maximising predictive expected log-growth; validity is therefore preserved even when the prior or working model is misspecified. We prove that if the predictive distribution is Wasserstein-consistent, the resulting procedure is asymptotically log-optimal, matching the per-sample log-growth of an oracle procedure with access to the true distribution. We instantiate the framework using robust predictives based on Dirichlet-process mixtures and Bayesian exponentially tilted empirical likelihood. Experiments on synthetic data, sequential best-arm identification for LLM evaluation, and prediction-powered inference show that informative priors can substantially reduce confidence-sequence width and sampling effort while retaining anytime-valid coverage.

AI agents are assuming active roles in Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) workflows, yet the research community lacks a shared vocabulary for describing what it means for CI/CD to be agentic, how much decision authority is delegated, and where control should reside. This paper presents a vision of agentic CI/CD in which the central challenge is not improving task performance but designing authority transfer, defined as the delegation of operational decisions from human-controlled pipelines to agent systems under specified constraints and recourse mechanisms. To structure this argument, we introduce a distinction between data-plane authority (localized interventions such as patch generation and test reruns) and control-plane authority (modifications to pipeline configuration, deployment policies, and approval gates). Drawing on research prototypes and industrial platforms, we show that current systems operate mainly at the data plane under bounded autonomy, with safety achieved through surrounding governance infrastructure rather than intrinsic agent guarantees. We identify three recurring patterns: constrained autonomy as the dominant design, external governance as the primary safety mechanism, and a widening gap between deployment momentum and evaluation methodology. We propose a research agenda in which control-plane safety and governance mechanisms represent the most urgent open problem, followed by formalization of autonomy boundaries, evaluation frameworks, and human--agent coordination.

In this paper, we investigate the supremum-norm generalization error and the uniform inference for a specific class of kernel regression methods, namely the kernel gradient flows. Under the widely adopted capacity-source condition framework in the kernel regression literature, we first establish convergence rates for the supremum norm generalization error of both continuous and discrete kernel gradient flows under the source condition $s>α_0$, where $α_0\in(0,1)$ denotes the embedding index of the kernel function. Moreover, we show that these rates match the minimax optimal rates. Building on this result, we then construct simultaneous confidence bands for both continuous and discrete kernel gradient flows. Notably, the widths of the proposed confidence bands are also optimal, in the sense that their shrinkage rates are greater than, while can be arbitrarily close to, the minimax optimal rates.

Learning-based approaches to verifying unknown Markov decision processes (MDPs) often employ uncertain MDPs. These models use, for example, confidence intervals to capture transition uncertainty and allow synthesis of policies that are robust to this uncertainty. However, this approach typically quantifies uncertainty independently for individual transition probabilities, ignoring dependencies due to shared latent quantities. We propose to learn such models using parametric MDPs (pMDPs), where transition probabilities are expressions over a set of parameters. We project statistical uncertainty from empirical transition frequencies onto the pMDP's parameter space, yielding a probably approximately correct (PAC) uncertainty model for the underlying MDP that respects the algebraic dependencies between transitions. The resulting models are algorithmically challenging to solve, so we propose a hierarchy of sound polytopic outer approximations of the induced confidence set. We implement and evaluate our approach, demonstrating substantially tighter uncertainty estimates than classical interval-based uncertain MDP learning techniques.

Emerging AI systems in behavioral health and psychiatry use multi-step or multi-agent LLM pipelines for tasks like assessing self-harm risk and screening for depression. However, common evaluation approaches, like LLM-as-a-judge, do not indicate when a decision is reliable or how errors may accumulate across multiple LLM judgements, limiting their suitability for safety-critical settings. We present a statistical framework for multi-agent pipelines structured as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) that provides an alternative to heuristic voting with principled, adaptive decision-making. We model each agent as a stochastic categorical decision and introduce (1) tighter agent-level performance confidence bounds, (2) a bandit-based adaptive sampling strategy based on input difficulty, and (3) regret guarantees over the multi-agent system that shows logarithmic error growth when deployed. We evaluate our system on two labeled datasets in behavioral health : the AEGIS 2.0 behavioral health subset (N=161) and a stratified sample of SWMH Reddit posts (N=250). Empirically, our adaptive sampling strategy achieves the lowest false positive rate of any condition across both datasets, 0.095 on AEGIS 2.0 compared to 0.159 for single-agent models, reducing incorrect flagging of safe content by 40% and still having similar false negative rates across all conditions. These results suggest that principled adaptive sampling offers a meaningful improvement in precision without reducing recall in this setting.

In this work, we revisit the problem of active sequential prediction-powered mean estimation, where at each round one must decide the query probability of the ground-truth label upon observing the covariates of a sample. Furthermore, if the label is not queried, the prediction from a machine learning model is used instead. Prior work proposed an elegant scheme that determines the query probability by combining an uncertainty-based suggestion with a constant probability that encodes a soft constraint on the query probability. We explored different values of the mixing parameter and observed an intriguing empirical pattern: the smallest confidence width tends to occur when the weight on the constant probability is close to one, thereby reducing the influence of the uncertainty-based component. Motivated by this observation, we develop a non-asymptotic analysis of the estimator and establish a data-dependent bound on its confidence interval. Our analysis further suggests that when a no-regret learning approach is used to determine the query probability and control this bound, the query probability converges to the constraint of the max value of the query probability when it is chosen obliviously to the current covariates. We also conduct simulations that corroborate these theoretical findings.

In high-stakes scenarios, such as medical imaging applications, it is critical to equip the predictions of a regression model with reliable confidence intervals. Recently, Conformal Prediction (CP) has emerged as a powerful statistical framework that, based on a labeled calibration set, generates intervals that include the true labels with a pre-specified probability. In this paper, we address the problem of applying CP for regression models when the calibration set contains noisy labels. We begin by establishing a mathematically grounded procedure for estimating the noise-free CP threshold. Then, we turn it into a practical algorithm that overcomes the challenges arising from the continuous nature of the regression problem. We evaluate the proposed method on two medical imaging regression datasets with Gaussian label noise. Our method significantly outperforms the existing alternative, achieving performance close to the clean-label setting.

Off-policy evaluation (OPE) methods estimate the value of a new reinforcement learning (RL) policy prior to deployment. Recent advances have shown that leveraging auxiliary datasets, such as those synthesized by generative models, can improve the accuracy of OPE methods. Unfortunately, such auxiliary datasets may also be biased, and existing methods for using data augmentation within OPE lack principled uncertainty quantification. In high stakes domains like healthcare, reliable uncertainty estimates are important for ensuring safe and informed deployment of RL policies. In this work, we propose two methods to construct valid confidence intervals for OPE with data augmentation. The first provides a confidence interval over $V^π(s)$, the policy value conditioned on an initial state $s$. To do so we introduce a new conformal prediction method suitable for Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) with continuous state spaces, extending prior work to higher-dimensional settings. Second, we consider the more common task of estimating the average policy performance over all initial states, $V^π$; we introduce a method that draws on ideas from doubly robust estimation and prediction powered inference. Across simulators spanning inventory management, robotics, healthcare, and a real healthcare dataset from MIMIC-IV, we find that our methods can effectively leverage auxiliary data and consistently produce confidence intervals that cover the ground truth policy values, unlike previously proposed methods. Our work enables a future in which OPE can provide rigorous uncertainty estimates for high-stakes domains.

Discrete choice models (DCMs) are used to analyze individual decision-making in contexts such as transportation choices, political elections, and consumer preferences. DCMs play a central role in applied econometrics by enabling inference on key economic variables, such as marginal rates of substitution, rather than focusing solely on predicting choices on new unlabeled data. However, while traditional DCMs offer high interpretability and support for point and interval estimation of economic quantities, these models often underperform in predictive tasks compared to deep learning (DL) models. Despite their predictive advantages, DL models remain largely underutilized in discrete choice due to concerns about their lack of interpretability, unstable parameter estimates, and the absence of established methods for uncertainty quantification. Here, we introduce a deep learning model architecture specifically designed to integrate with approximate Bayesian inference methods, such as Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics (SGLD). Our proposed model collapses to behaviorally informed hypotheses when data is limited, mitigating overfitting and instability in underspecified settings while retaining the flexibility to capture complex nonlinear relationships when sufficient data is available. We demonstrate our approach using SGLD through a Monte Carlo simulation study, evaluating both predictive metrics--such as out-of-sample balanced accuracy--and inferential metrics--such as empirical coverage for marginal rates of substitution interval estimates. Additionally, we present results from two empirical case studies: one using revealed mode choice data in NYC, and the other based on the widely used Swiss train choice stated preference data.

The $K$-Max combinatorial multi-armed bandit problem arises in applications such as recommendation and distributed decision making, where the reward is determined by the maximum outcome among $K$ selected arms. When outcomes are continuous and only the maximum value together with the winner's index is observed, this problem introduces unprecedented difficulties including discretization errors, non-deterministic tie-breaking, and severe estimation biases. To overcome these barriers, we introduce DCK-UCB, an efficient algorithm combining adaptive discretization with bias-corrected confidence bounds. We prove that DCK-UCB achieves a $\widetilde{O}(T^{3/4})$ regret bound, the first sublinear guarantee in this setting. Numerical experiments show strong performance over baseline methods. Furthermore, for the specific case of exponential distributions under full-bandit feedback, we propose the MLE-Exp algorithm that attains a near-optimal $\widetilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ regret bound. This work establishes fundamental theoretical guarantees and provides a powerful algorithmic solution for continuous combinatorial bandits.

We consider a replicable stochastic multi-armed bandit algorithm that ensures, with high probability, that the algorithm's sequence of actions is not affected by the randomness inherent in the dataset. Replicability allows third parties to reproduce published findings and assists the original researcher in applying standard statistical tests. We observe that existing algorithms require $O(K^2/ρ^2)$ times more regret than nonreplicable algorithms, where $K$ is the number of arms and $ρ$ is the level of nonreplication. However, we demonstrate that this additional cost is unnecessary when the time horizon $T$ is sufficiently large for a given $K, ρ$, provided that the magnitude of the confidence bounds is chosen carefully. Therefore, for a large $T$, our algorithm only requires $K^2/ρ^2$ times smaller amount of exploration than existing algorithms. To ensure the replicability of the proposed algorithms, we incorporate randomness into their decision-making processes. We propose a principled approach to limiting the probability of nonreplication. This approach elucidates the steps that existing research has implicitly followed. Furthermore, we derive the first lower bound for the two-armed replicable bandit problem, which implies the optimality of the proposed algorithms up to a $\log\log T$ factor for the two-armed case.