Monotonicity

Identification of causal directionality in bivariate numerical data is a fundamental research problem with important practical implications. This paper presents two alternative methods to identify direction of causation by considering conditional distributions: (1) Anticipated Asymmetric Geometries (AAG) and (2) Monotonicity Index (MI). The AAG method compares the actual conditional distributions to anticipated ones along two variables. Different comparison metrics, such as Pearson correlation, cosine distance, Jaccard index, K-L divergence, K-S distance, MAE, MSE, and mutual information have been evaluated. Anticipated distributions have been projected as normal based on dual response statistics: mean and standard deviation. The MI method compares the calculated monotonicity indexes of the gradients of conditional distributions along two axes and exhibits counts of gradient sign changes. Both methods assume stochastic properties of the bivariate data and exploit anticipated unimodality of conditional distributions of the effect. The proposed methods are straightforward and include only a limited number of hyperparameters that affect the accuracy of the identification. For a given set of hyperparameters, both the AAG and MI methods provide a unique, deterministic solution. To address sensitivity to hyperparameters, tuning has been done by utilizing a full factorial Design of Experiment. It turns out that the AAG method outperforms MI, achieving top weighted accuracies of 81.4% with simple tuning and 84.3% with size-adaptive tuning, compared with 81.6% for GRCI or 82.0% for CAREFL-H on the 99 pairs of the Tubingen real-world cause-effect examples. A decision tree has been fitted to distinguish misclassified cases using the input data's symmetrical bivariate statistics to address the question of: How decisive is the identification method of causal directionality?

Policy gradient methods for Large Language Models optimize a policy $π_θ$ via a surrogate objective computed from samples of a rollout policy $π_{\text{roll}}$. However, modern LLM-RL pipelines suffer from unavoidable implementation divergences -- backend discrepancies, Mixture-of-Experts routing discontinuities, and distributed training staleness -- causing off-policy mismatch ($π_{\text{roll}} \neq π_θ$) and approximation errors between the surrogate and the true objective. We demonstrate that classical trust region bounds on this error scale as $O(T^2)$ with sequence length $T$, rendering them vacuous for long-horizon tasks. To address this, we derive a family of bounds -- both KL-based and TV-based -- including a Pinsker-Marginal bound ($O(T^{3/2})$), a Mixed bound ($O(T)$), and an Adaptive bound that strictly generalizes the Pinsker-Marginal bound via per-position importance-ratio decomposition. Taking the minimum over all bounds yields the tightest known guarantee across all divergence regimes. Crucially, all bounds depend on the maximum token-level divergence $D_{\mathrm{KL}}^{\mathrm{tok,max}}$ (or $D_{\mathrm{TV}}^{\mathrm{tok,max}}$), a sequence-level quantity that cannot be controlled by token-independent methods like PPO clipping. We propose Trust Region Masking (TRM), which masks entire sequences violating the trust region, enabling the first non-vacuous monotonic improvement guarantees for long-horizon LLM-RL.

Functions that grow without bound on one side of the real line and decay to zero on the other cannot be approximated uniformly by ordinary polynomials on unbounded domains. Motivated by classical weighted polynomial approximation, we introduce a class of one-sided weighted \emph{deep} (composite) polynomial approximants for such asymmetric targets. The weight suppresses polynomial growth on the decaying side, while the composite polynomial remains free to capture growth on the other side. We prove that this mechanism reduces the half-line approximation problem to approximation on a compact interval whose length grows slowly with the degree, and we establish density and existence of best approximants in the appropriate closure of the model class. For computation, we first formulate the method as a trainable computational graph for \emph{deep} weighted polynomial approximation. However, direct end-to-end optimization becomes increasingly ill-conditioned at high composite degree and can suffer from local minima. To address this, we introduce a fine-tuning procedure in which a fixed inner composition of monotone polynomial self-maps supplies the effective degree, while only the outer polynomial and weight parameters are trained; the outer fit reduces to a linear program. Numerical experiments on Black--Scholes option-pricing functions show that the resulting fine-tuned weighted \emph{deep} polynomial achieves smaller uniform and $L_2$ errors than matched-budget polynomial baselines and resolves the decaying tail to machine precision.

Semi-supervised anomaly detection is based on the principle that any record that looks different from normal training data is a potential anomaly. However, in some cases we are specifically interested in anomalies that correspond to high attribute values (or low, but not both). For distance-based methods, we propose an asymmetrical distance measure that takes this monotonicity into account by incorporating the ramp function. For the Isolation Forest algorithm, we propose a modified path length algorithm. Through experiments on synthetic and real-life datasets, we show that these proposals increase anomaly detection performance on datasets with monotonic attributes.

Stochastic optimization is a widely used approach for optimization under uncertainty, where uncertain input parameters are modeled by random variables. Exact or approximation algorithms have been obtained for several fundamental problems in this area. However, a significant limitation of this approach is that it requires full knowledge of the underlying probability distributions. Can we still get good (approximation) algorithms if these distributions are unknown, and the algorithm needs to learn them through repeated interactions? In this paper, we resolve this question for a large class of ''monotone'' stochastic problems, by providing a generic online learning algorithm with $\sqrt{T\log(T)}$ regret relative to the best approximation algorithm (under known distributions). Importantly, our online algorithm works in a semi-bandit setting, where in each period, the algorithm only observes samples from the random variables that were actually probed. Moreover, our result extends to settings with censored and binary feedback, where the policy only observes truncated or thresholded versions of the probed variables. Our framework applies to several fundamental problems such as prophet inequality, Pandora's box, stochastic knapsack, single-resource revenue management and sequential posted pricing.

We provide a theoretical analysis of Adam under non-stationary stochastic objectives, separating two regimes: Euclidean tracking under adaptive strong monotonicity of the Adam-preconditioned mean-gradient operator, and high-probability projected stationarity guarantees under general $L$-smooth objectives. In the tracking regime, we derive finite-time expected and high-probability bounds that decompose sharply into four components: initialization, objective drift, a first-moment tracking error governed by $\beta_1$, and a preconditioner perturbation governed by $\beta_2$. We characterize the burn-in time required for the transient terms to decay to the asymptotic tracking bound under constant and step-decay schedules. We also prove a high-probability bound on the average projected stationarity gap for Adam under distribution shift. Across both analyses, our bounds reveal a noise--drift tradeoff: in noise-dominated regimes, first-moment averaging and adaptive preconditioning can yield favorable upper guarantees, whereas in drift-dominated regimes, stale first-moment information and preconditioner perturbations can enlarge Adam's tracking guarantee, potentially allowing vanilla SGD to attain a smaller tracking error. Our explicit $(\beta_1,\beta_2,\epsilon)$-dependent bounds identify mechanisms through which adaptive step-sizing can help or hurt under nonstationarity and provide theoretical explanations consistent with Adam's empirical instability and stabilization under distribution shift.