Probability

We introduce a probabilistic splat-based radiance field framework that retains the fast rasterization and test-time efficiency of 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) while replacing heuristic primitive manipulation with gradient-based optimization of a volumetric probability density. Rather than relocating, splitting, or culling Gaussians via hand-tuned densification (e.g., ADC), we treat primitive locations as samples drawn from a persistent, learnable density. We instantiate this density using a novel, memory-efficient multi-scale hierarchical grid that enables end-to-end gradient-based optimization. To stabilize the optimization, we derive an unbiased gradient estimator with control variates that markedly reduces variance. By allowing probability mass to flow to where the loss demands, our framework eliminates brittle priors and naturally explores the volume, achieving state-of-the-art reconstruction quality on mip-NeRF 360 while preserving 3DGS-level rendering speed.

Probabilistic forecasting estimates the likelihood of uncertain future events. To improve LLM forecasting, existing methods typically learn from binary outcomes to output verbalized forecasts. However, while aggregated human forecasts contain rich information in both the crowd probability estimate and the degree of agreement among forecasters, how to utilize these signals remains underexplored. To address this, we propose the Beta-Bernoulli Calibrator (BBC), which converts an initial point estimate forecast from any model into a distribution over event likelihood, using supervision from both binary outcomes and human forecasts. BBC models event likelihood $p \sim \text{Beta}(α, β)$ and outcome $y \sim \text{Bernoulli}(p)$, with the mean as the calibrated point forecast and the variance as the epistemic uncertainty. Our results show that BBC generally provides better calibrated and more accurate forecasts than both traditional post-hoc calibration methods and models fine-tuned specifically for forecasting, while remaining lightweight and having good generalization. We also show that the epistemic uncertainty captured by BBC is a more reliable predictor of forecasting error than verbalized confidence.

Hallucination is a central limitation of large language models (LLMs), and substantial effort has been devoted to understanding and mitigating it. Towards this, Kalai and Vempala (STOC 2024) introduced a probabilistic framework formalizing calibration and hallucination, and showed that, with high probability, calibrated LLMs hallucinate roughly at the rate of the "missing mass", a measure of how incomplete the training data is relative to its source. This raises two fundamental questions: (i) what property of a calibrated LLM makes hallucinations unavoidable? and (ii) can hallucinations be avoided by giving up calibration? We answer these questions by introducing a simpler property we call innovation that measures the tendency of a model to produce outputs outside the training data. We show that innovation is implied by the condition for hallucination identified by Kalai and Vempala, and, further, that it is an almost characterization of hallucination: hallucination implies innovation, and conversely, innovation implies hallucination with high probability. We also provide lower bounds on the hallucination rate based on the "innovation rate", and by relating innovation rate back to missing mass, we obtain new hallucination rate lower bounds based on missing mass that extend the results of Kalai and Vempala.

Over the centuries, probability theory has grown from the calculus of games of chance into a central framework for reasoning under uncertainty. This article interprets that evolution not merely as a mathematical history, but as a transformation of rationality itself. From Pascal and Fermat's combinatorial symmetry to the inductive logic of Bayes and Laplace, from Poisson's statistics of events to Kolmogorov's axiomatic formalization, probability progressively incorporated uncertainty, time, and coherence into scientific judgment. This trajectory reaches a mature epistemological form in modern Bayesian inference, especially in Tarantola's view of probability as a logic of information, where prior knowledge and data are combined coherently. Yet this framework also exposes a limit: probability quantifies uncertainty about well-defined propositions, but does not by itself formalize the vagueness of the concepts used to describe them. The article therefore examines how rationality extends beyond probability. Fuzzy logic is presented as a rigorous language for graded meaning and qualitative judgment, while deep learning is analyzed as a distinct, powerful mode of prediction based on geometric interpolation and optimization rather than explicit inference. By situating probability, fuzzy logic, and deep learning in a common historical and epistemological perspective, the article clarifies their roles and limits. It argues that contemporary scientific rationality cannot be reduced to data-driven performance alone, but requires the explicit articulation of uncertainty, vagueness, and inference.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are predominantly governed by probabilistic frameworks in which the sum of outcome probabilities is constrained to unity. This architectural limitation, often imposed by Softmax layers, leads to a collapse of uncertainty that makes it difficult to differentiate between epistemic uncertainty, paradox, and vagueness. We present an empirical investigation of the application of Neutrosophic Logic, a framework that treats Truth (T), Indeterminacy (I), and Falsity (F) as three independent dimensions, to model epistemic states in LLMs. We conducted experiments on a family of four OpenAI GPT models across five linguistic phenomena: logical paradoxes, epistemic ignorance, vagueness, ethical contradictions, and future contingencies, under three prompting strategies: neutrosophic, probabilistic, and entropy-derived. Our findings reveal that the neutrosophic approach, by allowing T+I+F > 1, a state we term hyper-truth, provides a richer representation of a model's internal state. In 35% of evaluations, hyper-truth emerged spontaneously, predominantly under ethical contradiction and logical paradox. We demonstrate that this approach preserves truth values in fuzzy contexts and offers a robust method for identifying and quantifying internal model conflict. We conclude that the integration of neutrosophic evaluation layers is a critical step toward more transparent, reliable, and ethically aware AI systems.

Hallucination is often viewed as a direct consequence of missing knowledge: a model answers incorrectly when the correct answer is absent from its generation-time distribution, and correctly when it is present. We test this assumption by introducing a semantic notion of answer availability that aggregates token-level variants expressing the same answer concept, and asks whether the correct concept is already available at the moment the model commits to an answer. Across Qwen and Llama models from 0.8B to 72B in both Instruct and Base variants, 16-47% of Instruct hallucinations occur with substantial probability mass already on the correct concept, and the rate rises monotonically with scale. Comparing such failures against correct generations with matched semantic support, the distinguishing factor is not whether the correct concept is represented, but how its probability is distributed: correct generations concentrate mass on a single surface form, hallucinations disperse it across alternatives. The same sharpening asymmetry extends across multi-token generation and is detectable in pre-generation hidden states. Together, these results identify a single mechanism: instruction tuning sharpens answer commitment with scale, making helpfulness and confident hallucination two consequences of the same underlying disposition.

Predictive models play a pivotal role in credit risk management, guiding critical decisions through accurate estimation of default probabilities and losses. Extensive research has introduced new modeling techniques, complemented by large-scale benchmarking studies consolidating the state-of-the-art. Today, quasi-standards such as gradient-boosting models paired with SHAP explainers have emerged, yet continuous improvement of risk models remains a top priority. Concurrently, rapid advancements in AI, most notably large language models, have disrupted predictive modeling paradigms. Foundation models, pretrained on extensive datasets from diverse domains, have demonstrated remarkable performance by leveraging prior knowledge. While prevalent in natural language processing and computer vision, foundation models for tabular data have only recently emerged. We conjecture that pretraining on out-of-domain data is particularly beneficial in small-data settings, such as SME lending or specialized corporate portfolios, and may help address longstanding challenges including low default portfolios and class imbalance. This paper benchmarks recently proposed tabular foundation models against a broad set of competitors, including established and advanced machine learning techniques, across two core tasks: PD and LGD modeling. Our evaluation encompasses various datasets, performance indicators, and experimental conditions. We find that tabular foundation models generally perform best across datasets and tasks. Moreover, they offer significant improvement in predictive performance as dataset size shrinks. These results are remarkable given that the models are tested out-of-the-box, without hyperparameter tuning, ensuring ease of use and mitigating computational costs.

AI generated predictions increasingly inform decision making in critical tasks, and therefore must be trustworthy. One widely used measure of trustworthiness is calibration, which requires that the predictions match the true frequencies and can be treated like real probabilities of a given outcome. However, defining calibration is subtle, and designing good measures of calibration error has been an active topic of recent research. The first goal is to find calibration measures that are actionable, meaning they can inform decision makers about their utility loss when predictions are treated as true probabilities, which is known as swap regret. The second goal is to find calibration measures that are testable, meaning that calibration error can be measured from a small sample of predictions and outcomes. Although these are very basic requirements, there is no existing calibration measure that fully satisfies both properties, and all existing measures relax actionability by bounding a weaker notion of swap regret, or relax testability by having suboptimal estimation error. We introduce a new calibration measure, Soft-Binned Calibration Decision Loss (SCDL), which we prove is fully actionable without weakening either requirement, and testable with nearly optimal error rate. In addition, SCDL satisfies other desired properties such as continuity and consistency. We also provide a set of experiments confirming that the theoretical advantages of SCDL compared to other measures lead to better performance in practice.

Stochastic estimators are fundamental to large-scale optimization, where population quantities must be inferred from noisy oracle observations. Although influential methods such as momentum, SPIDER, STORM, and PAGE have been highly successful, their analyses are largely estimator-specific and expectation-based, obscuring the structural tradeoffs that determine reliability. In this paper, we develop a unified framework for stochastic variance-reduced estimation based on a recursion with three components: memory retention, reset probability, and a correction term for iterate movement. This framework recovers several classical estimators, motivates new second-order variants, and yields a bias-variance decomposition of estimation error. Our main result is a unified high-probability bound proved using a new dimension-free vector-valued Freedman inequality, valid for smooth normed spaces involving random sums of vector martingales. The result applies in both Euclidean and non-Euclidean settings, including the analysis of mirror-descent-based methods in Banach spaces. As applications, we obtain high-probability oracle complexities for unconstrained optimization with mirror descent, establishing the logarithmic dependence on the confidence level. We also derive the first $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(\varepsilon^{-3})$ oracle-complexity bounds for stochastic optimization with expectation constraints, improving upon the existing $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(\varepsilon^{-4})$ complexity by leveraging variance-reduced estimation for the first time in this setting.

In safety-critical applications, language models should be able to characterize their uncertainty with meaningful probabilities. Many uncertainty quantification approaches require supervised data; however, finding suitable unseen challenging data is increasingly difficult for large language models trained on vast amounts of scraped data. If the model is consistently (and correctly) confident in its predictions, the uncertainty quantification method may consistently overestimate confidence on new and unfamiliar data. Finding data which exhibits enough uncertainty to train supervised uncertainty quantification methods for high-performance models may therefore be challenging, and will increase in difficulty as LLMs saturate datasets. To address this issue, we first introduce the problem of inducing artificial uncertainty in language models, then investigate methods of inducing artificial uncertainty on trivially easy data in the absence of challenging data at training time. We use probes trained to recognize artificial uncertainty on the original model, and find that these probes trained on artificial uncertainty outperform probes trained without artificial uncertainty in recognizing real uncertainty, achieving notably higher calibration on hard data with minimal loss of performance on easy data.

Flow Matching is a powerful framework for learning transport maps between probability distributions. Yet its standard single-parameter formulation is not designed to capture multi-parameter variations where the resulting transport should be path-independent. Path independence is crucial because it ensures that transformations depend only on the initial and target distributions, not on the specific path. In this work, we introduce Path-independent Flow Matching (PiFM), a method for learning vector fields whose induced flows yield path-independent transport between distributions. We show that PiFM generalizes Flow Matching to higher-dimensional parameter domains while enforcing structural conditions that ensure consistency of composed transformations. In addition, we show that, under suitable assumptions, PiFM approximates the Wasserstein barycenter, linking the framework to a notion of distributional interpolation. To enable practical training, we propose a tractable, simulation-free objective that regresses onto multi-parameter conditional probability paths. We showcase empirically that PiFM outperforms other approaches on both synthetic and real world data in interpolating path-independent trajectories and generating desired out of distribution samples.

Grammaticality and likelihood are distinct notions in human language. Pretrained language models (LMs), which are probabilistic models of language fitted to maximize corpus likelihood, generate grammatically well-formed text and discriminate well between grammatical and ungrammatical sentences in tightly controlled minimal pairs. However, their string probabilities do not sharply discriminate between grammatical and ungrammatical sentences overall. But do LMs implicitly acquire a grammaticality distinction distinct from string probability? We explore this question through studying internal representations of LMs, by training a linear probe on a dataset of grammatical and (synthetic) ungrammatical sentences obtained by applying perturbations to a naturalistic text corpus. We find that this simple grammaticality probe generalizes to human-curated grammaticality judgment benchmarks and outperforms LM probability-based grammaticality judgments. When applied to semantic plausibility benchmarks, in which both members of a minimal pair are grammatical and differ in only plausibility, the probe however performs worse than string probability. The English-trained probe also exhibits nontrivial cross-lingual generalization, outperforming string probabilities on grammaticality benchmarks in numerous other languages. Additionally, probe scores correlate only weakly with string probabilities. These results collectively suggest that LMs acquire to some extent an implicit grammaticality distinction within their hidden layers.

Quantum cognition often explains order effects, contextuality, and violations of the law of total probability by replacing classical probability with quantum probability on a fixed event structure. This paper proposes a different interpretation: quantum probability is the fixed-spacetime projection of contextual spacetime formation under finite-state requirements. The framework begins not with time, space, objects, or probabilities, but with requirements such as finite representational capacity, single-state semantic stability, context-sensitive intervention, avoidance of explicit context labels, coherent world-formation, and intersubjective transformability. When these requirements cannot be realized within a single global Boolean event structure, the mismatch appears, under fixed-spacetime projection, as noncommutativity, interference, and quantum-like probability. Building on prior single-state approaches to contextuality, we reinterpret classical contextual bookkeeping cost as the fixed-spacetime shadow of contextual spacetime formation. Auxiliary memory or context labels in a classical representation correspond, in this account, to holonomy-like mismatch among locally Boolean logic-worlds. The interference term is the cross term generated when locally classical realization contributions are nontrivially glued and projected back into a fixed classical spacetime form. The result is a transcendental-operational realist account: objecthood, eventhood, probability, and spacetime are treated as forms of realization under requirements, while objectivity is defined by invariants preserved across observer- and history-dependent spacetime formations.

The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve of a binary classifier has often been utilized to measure the performance of the classifier. The area beneath this curve is used in particular because of its quoted probabilistic interpretation as being equal to the probability that the classifier will rank a random positive observation above a random negative observation. This paper formalizes this claim, produces a bound on how far away from the truth it is if a hypothesis is not met, and gives a small literature review of the ROC curve.

Cellular differentiation is governed by gene regulatory networks, the high-dimensional stochastic biochemical systems that determine the transcriptional landscape and mediate cellular responses to signals and perturbations. Although single-cell RNA sequencing provides quantitative snapshots of the transcriptome, current methods for inferring gene-regulatory dynamics often lack mechanistic interpretability and fail to generalize to unseen conditions. Here we introduce Probability Flow Matching (PFM), a scalable framework for learning biophysically consistent stochastic processes directly from time-resolved single-cell measurements. Applying PFM to three hematopoiesis datasets, we show that models with similar interpolation accuracy can encode fundamentally different dynamics, with only biophysically consistent formulations accurately capturing mechanisms of lineage transitions, fate specification, and gene perturbation responses. We further demonstrate that PFM accommodates unbalanced populations, enabling simultaneous inference of cellular proliferation and death dynamics. Together, these results establish PFM as a flexible, scalable framework for integrating mechanistic modeling with single-cell omics.

The goal of machine learning is to find models that minimize prediction error on data that has not yet been seen. Its operational paradigm assumes access to a dataset $S$ and articulates a scheme for evaluating how well a given model performs on an arbitrary sample. The sample can be $S$ (in which case we speak of in-sample'' performance) or some entirely new $S'$ (in which case we speak of out-of-sample'' performance). Traditional analysis of generalization assumes that both in- and out-of-sample data are i.i.d.\ draws from an infinite population. However, these probabilistic assumptions cannot be verified even in principle. This paper presents an alternative view of generalization through the lens of sensitivity analysis of solutions of optimization problems to perturbations in the problem data. Under this framework, generalization bounds are obtained by purely deterministic means and take the form of variational principles that relate in-sample and out-of-sample evaluations through an error term that quantifies how close out-of-sample data are to in-sample data. Statistical assumptions can then be used \textit{ex post} to characterize the situations when this error term is small (either on average or with high probability).

Large language models (LLMs) require frequent knowledge updates to reflect changing facts and mitigate hallucinations. To meet this demand, lifelong knowledge editing has emerged as a continual approach to modify specific pieces of knowledge without retraining the entire model. Existing parameter editing methods struggle with stability during sequential edits due to catastrophic forgetting. While retrieval-based approaches are proposed to alleviate this issue, their applicability remains limited across various datasets because of high training costs. To address these limitations and enhance scalability in lifelong settings, we propose LightEdit. Our framework first selects relevant knowledge from retrieved information to modify the query effectively. It then incorporates a decoding strategy to suppress the model's original knowledge probabilities, thereby enabling efficient edits based on the selected information. Extensive experiments on ZSRE, Counterfact, and RIPE benchmarks demonstrate that LightEdit outperforms existing lifelong knowledge editing methods. Furthermore, by minimizing training costs, LightEdit achieves cost-effective scalability, enabling easy adaptation to various datasets.

Defeasible statements are statements that are likely, or probable, or usually true, but may occasionally be false. Plausible reasoning makes conclusions from statements that are either facts or defeasible statements without using numbers. So there are no probabilities or suchlike involved. Seventeen principles of logics that do plausible reasoning are suggested and several important plausible reasoning examples are considered. There are 14 necessary principles and 3 desirable principles, one of which is not formally stated. A first-order logic, called Plausible Logic (PL), is defined that satisfies all but two of the desirable principles and reasons correctly with all the examples. As far as we are aware, this is the only such logic. PL has 8 reasoning algorithms because, from a given plausible reasoning situation, there are different sensible conclusions. This article is a condensation of my book `Plausible Reasoning and Plausible Logic' (PRPL), which is to be submitted. Each section of this article corresponds to a chapter in PRPL, and vice versa. The proofs of all the results are in PRPL, so they are omitted in this article.

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.

Recent research has shown that large language models (LLMs) favor their own outputs when acting as judges, undermining the integrity of automated post-training and evaluation workflows. However, it is difficult to disentangle which behaviors are explained by narcissism versus experimental confounds. Specifically, LLM evaluators may deliver self-preferring verdicts when comparing responses to questions they fail on; these verdicts may not depend on the identity of the author, but on evaluator quality. We correct this by directly comparing the judge's voting distribution in cases where it evaluates itself versus another model. This evaluator quality baseline reveals that only 51% of examples in previous findings retain statistical significance against this null hypothesis, covering 89.6% of total self-preference probability mass. Finally, we compare the entropy of voting distributions, suggesting uncertainty-driven overlap, and show that our procedure enables more careful documentation against the backdrop of judge-bias research.

Limited-Area Models (LAMs) enable weather forecasting over regional domains at higher resolutions than what is computationally feasible for global models. At such high resolutions, machine learning approaches for weather prediction increasingly rely on ensemble methods to produce probabilistic forecasts. However, existing machine learning LAMs are not scalable due to relying on computationally costly diffusion models or inefficient graph neural networks. We tackle this by introducing a new hybrid CNN/GNN architecture, tailored to the LAM weather forecasting problem. Using this architecture, we construct the DET-LAM deterministic model, producing LAM forecasts both more efficiently and accurately than its graph-based competitor. We then tackle the ensemble forecasting problem, by using this architecture as a backbone for the generative model CRPS-LAM. CRPS-LAM is trained using a Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS) objective, enabling efficient training and sampling in a single forward pass. This yields a speedup of $\approx \times 39$ compared to diffusion-based baselines. We evaluate our approach on regional domains in northern Europe, demonstrating that CRPS-LAM produces skillful and well-calibrated forecasts across a range of atmospheric variables.

This paper offers a new concept of {\it possibility} as an alternative to the now-a-days standard concept originally introduced by L.A. Zadeh in 1978. This new version was inspired by the original but, formally, has nothing in common with it other than that they both adopt the Łukasiewicz multivalent interpretation of the logical connectives. Moreover, rather than seeking to provide a general notion of possibility, this focuses specifically on the possibility of a real-world event. An event is viewed as having prerequisites that enable its occurrence and constraints that may impede its occurrence, and the possibility of the event is computed as a function of the probabilities that the prerequisites hold and the constraints do not. This version of possibility might appropriately be applied to problems of planning. When there are multiple plans available for achieving a goal, this theory can be used to determine which plan is most possible, i.e., easiest or most feasible to complete. It is speculated that this model of reasoning correctly captures normal human reasoning about plans. The theory is elaborated and an illustrative example for vehicle route planning is provided. There is also a suggestion of potential future applications.

Many prediction tasks can admit multiple models that can perform almost equally well. This phenomenon can undermine interpretability and safety when competing models assign conflicting predictions to individuals. In this work, we study how arbitrariness can arise in probabilistic classification tasks as a result of an effect that we call \emph{observational multiplicity}. We discuss how this effect arises in a broad class of practical applications where we learn a classifier to predict probabilities $p_i \in [0,1]$ but are given a dataset of observations $y_i \in \{0,1\}$. We propose to evaluate the arbitrariness of individual probability predictions through the lens of \emph{regret}. We introduce a measure of regret for probabilistic classification tasks, which measures how the predictions of a model could change as a result of different training labels. We present a general-purpose method to estimate the regret in a probabilistic classification task. We use our measure to show that regret is often higher for certain groups in the dataset and discuss potential applications of regret. We demonstrate how estimating regret can be used to promote safety in real-world applications by abstention and data collection.

This paper studies the $\ell^p$-Lipschitz constants of ReLU neural networks $Φ: \mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{R}$ with random parameters for $p \in [1,\infty]$. The distribution of the weights follows a variant of the He initialization. In the case of zero-bias networks, we derive high probability upper and lower bounds for wide networks that differ at most by a factor that is logarithmic in the network's depth. Remarkably, the behavior of the $\ell^p$-Lipschitz constant varies significantly between the regimes $p \in [1,2)$ and $p \in [2,\infty]$. For $p \in [2,\infty]$, the $\ell^p$-Lipschitz constant behaves similarly to $\Vert g\Vert_{p'}$, where $g \in \mathbb{R}^d$ is a $d$-dimensional standard Gaussian vector and $1/p + 1/p' = 1$. In contrast, for $p \in [1,2)$, the $\ell^p$-Lipschitz constant aligns more closely to $\Vert g \Vert_{2}$. We extend our analysis to networks with possibly non-zero biases drawn from arbitrary symmetric distributions. In this case, we obtain high probability upper and lower bounds that differ at most by a factor that is logarithmic in the network's width and linear in its depth.

We study distributionally robust optimization (DRO) for robust inference when the worst-case distribution is continuous, leading to significant computational challenges due to the infinite-dimensional nature of the optimization problem. Unlike traditional discrete DRO approaches, which often suffer from scalability issues, limited generalization, and costly worst-case inference, our framework exploits Brenier's theorem to characterize the least favorable distribution as the pushforward of a transport map from a continuous reference measure. This characterization motivates our study of the minimax problem in Wasserstein space. We propose an iterative algorithmic framework with multiple variants and establish global convergence guarantees under mild assumptions, deriving complexity bounds in terms of subgradient evaluations and inexact Jordan-Kinderlehrer-Otto updates. Numerical results with neural network-based transport maps demonstrate that the proposed method enables both stable training of robust classifiers and effective worst-case inference for classification tasks.