Matrix completion is a classical problem that has received recurring interest across a wide range of fields. In this paper, we revisit this problem in an ultra-sparse sampling regime, where each entry of an unknown, $n\times d$ matrix $M$ (with $n \ge d$) is observed independently with probability $p = C / d$, for a fixed integer $C \ge 2$. This setting is motivated by applications involving large, sparse panel datasets, where the number of rows far exceeds the number of columns. When each row contains only $C$ entries -- fewer than the rank of $M$ -- accurate imputation of $M$ is impossible. Instead, we estimate the row span of $M$ or the averaged second-moment matrix $T = M^{\top} M / n$. The empirical second-moment matrix computed from observed entries exhibits non-random and sparse missingness. We propose an unbiased estimator that normalizes each nonzero entry of the second moment by its observed frequency, followed by gradient descent to impute the missing entries of $T$. The normalization divides a weighted sum of $n$ binomial random variables by the total number of ones. We show that the estimator is unbiased for any $p$ and enjoys low variance. When the row vectors of $M$ are drawn uniformly from a rank-$r$ factor model satisfying an incoherence condition, we prove that if $n \ge O({d r^5 ε^{-2} C^{-2} \log d})$, any local minimum of the gradient-descent objective is approximately global and recovers $T$ with error at most $ε^2$. Experiments on both synthetic and real-world data validate our approach. On three MovieLens datasets, our algorithm reduces bias by $88\%$ relative to baseline estimators. We also empirically validate the linear sampling complexity of $n$ relative to $d$ on synthetic data. On an Amazon reviews dataset with sparsity $10^{-7}$, our method reduces the recovery error of $T$ by $59\%$ and $M$ by $38\%$ compared to baseline methods.

We propose a federated learning framework for the calibration of parametric insurance indices under heterogeneous renewable energy production losses. Producers locally model their losses using Tweedie generalized linear models and private data, while a common index is learned through federated optimization without sharing raw observations. The approach accommodates heterogeneity in variance and link functions and directly minimizes a global deviance objective in a distributed setting. We implement and compare FedAvg, FedProx and FedOpt, and benchmark them against an existing approximation-based aggregation method. An empirical application to solar power production in Germany shows that federated learning recovers comparable index coefficients under moderate heterogeneity, while providing a more general and scalable framework.

Instrumental variable based estimation of a causal effect has emerged as a standard approach to mitigate confounding bias in the social sciences and epidemiology, where conducting randomized experiments can be too costly or impossible. However, justifying the validity of the instrument often poses a significant challenge. In this work, we highlight a problem generally neglected in arguments for instrumental variable validity: the presence of an ''aggregate treatment variable'', where the treatment (e.g., education, GDP, caloric intake) is composed of finer-grained components that each may have a different effect on the outcome. We show that the causal effect of an aggregate treatment is generally ambiguous, as it depends on how interventions on the aggregate are instantiated at the component level, formalized through the aggregate-constrained component intervention distribution. We then characterize conditions on the interventional distribution and the aggregate setting under which standard instrumental variable estimators identify the aggregate effect. The contrived nature of these conditions implies major limitations on the interpretation of instrumental variable estimates based on aggregate treatments and highlights the need for a broader justificatory base for the exclusion restriction in such settings.

Semi-implicit variational inference (SIVI) enhances the expressiveness of variational families through hierarchical semi-implicit distributions, but the intractability of their densities makes standard ELBO-based optimization biased. Recent score-matching approaches to SIVI (SIVI-SM) address this issue via a minimax formulation, at the expense of an additional lower-level optimization problem. In this paper, we propose kernel semi-implicit variational inference (KSIVI), a principled and tractable alternative that eliminates the lower-level optimization by leveraging kernel methods. We show that when optimizing over a reproducing kernel Hilbert space, the lower-level problem admits an explicit solution, reducing the objective to the kernel Stein discrepancy (KSD). Exploiting the hierarchical structure of semi-implicit distributions, the resulting KSD objective can be efficiently optimized using stochastic gradient methods. We establish optimization guarantees via variance bounds on Monte Carlo gradient estimators and derive statistical generalization bounds of order $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(1/\sqrt{n})$. We further introduce a multi-layer hierarchical extension that improves expressiveness while preserving tractability. Empirical results on synthetic and real-world Bayesian inference tasks demonstrate the effectiveness of KSIVI.

Fairness-aware machine learning has recently attracted various communities to mitigate discrimination against certain societal groups in data-driven tasks. For fair supervised learning, particularly in pre-processing, there have been two main categories: data fairness and task-tailored fairness. The former directly finds an intermediate distribution among the groups, independent of the type of the downstream model, so a learned downstream classification/regression model returns similar predictive scores to individuals inputting the same covariates irrespective of their sensitive attributes. The latter explicitly takes the supervised learning task into account when constructing the pre-processing map. In this work, we study algorithmic fairness for supervised learning and argue that the data fairness approaches impose overly strong regularization from the perspective of the HGR correlation. This motivates us to devise a novel pre-processing approach tailored to supervised learning. We account for the trade-off between fairness and utility in obtaining the pre-processing map. Then we study the behavior of arbitrary downstream supervised models learned on the transformed data to find sufficient conditions to guarantee their fairness improvement and utility preservation. To our knowledge, no prior work in the branch of task-tailored methods has theoretically investigated downstream guarantees when using pre-processed data. We further evaluate our framework through comparison studies based on tabular and image data sets, showing the superiority of our framework which preserves consistent trade-offs among multiple downstream models compared to recent competing models. Particularly for computer vision data, we see our method alters only necessary semantic features related to the central machine learning task to achieve fairness.

Global sensitivity analysis of complex numerical simulators is often limited by the small number of model evaluations that can be afforded. In such settings, surrogate models built from a limited set of simulations can substantially reduce the computational burden, provided that the design of computer experiments is enriched efficiently. In this context, we propose an active learning approach that, for a fixed evaluation budget, targets the most informative regions of the input space to improve sensitivity analysis accuracy. More specifically, our method builds on recent advances in active learning for sensitivity analysis (Sobol' indices and derivative-based global sensitivity measures, DGSM) that exploit derivatives obtained from a Gaussian process (GP) surrogate. By leveraging the joint posterior distribution of the GP gradient, we develop acquisition functions that better account for correlations between partial derivatives and their impact on the response surface, leading to a more comprehensive and robust methodology than existing DGSM-oriented criteria. The proposed approach is first compared to state-of-the-art methods on standard benchmark functions, and is then applied to a real environmental model of pesticide transfers.

Algorithmic stability is a central concept in statistics and learning theory that measures how sensitive an algorithm's output is to small changes in the training data. Stability plays a crucial role in understanding generalization, robustness, and replicability, and a variety of stability notions have been proposed in different learning settings. However, while stability entails desirable properties, it is typically not sufficient on its own for statistical learning -- and indeed, it may be at odds with accuracy, since an algorithm that always outputs a constant function is perfectly stable but statistically meaningless. Thus, it is essential to understand the potential statistical cost of stability. In this work, we address this question by adopting a statistical decision-theoretic perspective, treating stability as a constraint in estimation. Focusing on two representative notions-worst-case stability and average-case stability-we first establish general lower bounds on the achievable estimation accuracy under each type of stability constraint. We then develop optimal stable estimators for four canonical estimation problems, including several mean estimation and regression settings. Together, these results characterize the optimal trade-offs between stability and accuracy across these tasks. Our findings formalize the intuition that average-case stability imposes a qualitatively weaker restriction than worst-case stability, and they further reveal that the gap between these two can vary substantially across different estimation problems.

Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) have emerged as a powerful tool for solving differential equations and modeling physical systems by embedding physical laws into the learning process. However, rigorously quantifying how well a PINN captures the complete dynamical behavior of the system, beyond simple trajectory prediction, remains a challenge. This paper proposes a novel experimental framework to address this by employing Fisher information for differentiable dynamical systems, denoted $g_F^C$. This Fisher information, distinct from its statistical counterpart, measures inherent uncertainties in deterministic systems, such as sensitivity to initial conditions, and is related to the phase space curvature and the net stretching action of the state space evolution. We hypothesize that if a PINN accurately learns the underlying dynamics of a physical system, then the Fisher information landscape derived from the PINN's learned equations of motion will closely match that of the original analytical model. This match would signify that the PINN has achieved comprehensive fidelity capturing not only the state evolution but also crucial geometric and stability properties. We outline an experimental methodology using the dynamical model of a car to compute and compare $g_F^C$ for both the analytical model and a trained PINN. The comparison, based on the Jacobians of the respective system dynamics, provides a quantitative measure of the PINN's fidelity in representing the system's intricate dynamical characteristics.

Outlier detection (OD) aims to identify abnormal instances, known as outliers or anomalies, by learning typical patterns of normal data, or inliers. Performing OD under an unsupervised regime-without any information about anomalous instances in the training data-is challenging. A recently observed phenomenon, known as the inlier-memorization (IM) effect, where deep generative models (DGMs) tend to memorize inlier patterns during early training, provides a promising signal for distinguishing outliers. However, existing unsupervised approaches that rely solely on the IM effect still struggle when inliers and outliers are not well-separated or when outliers form dense clusters. To address these limitations, we incorporate active learning to selectively acquire informative labels, and propose IMBoost, a novel framework that explicitly reinforces the IM effect to improve outlier detection. Our method consists of two stages: 1) a warm-up phase that induces and promotes the IM effect, and 2) a polarization phase in which actively queried samples are used to maximize the discrepancy between inlier and outlier scores. In particular, we propose a novel query strategy and tailored loss function in the polarization phase to effectively identify informative samples and fully leverage the limited labeling budget. We provide a theoretical analysis showing that the IMBoost consistently decreases inlier risk while increasing outlier risk throughout training, thereby amplifying their separation. Extensive experiments on diverse benchmark datasets demonstrate that IMBoost not only significantly outperforms state-of-the-art active OD methods but also requires substantially less computational cost.

Analysis of learned representations has a blind spot: it focuses on $similarity$, measuring how closely embeddings align with external references, but similarity reveals only what is represented, not whether that structure is robust. We introduce $geometric$ $stability$, a distinct dimension that quantifies how reliably representational geometry holds under perturbation, and present $Shesha$, a framework for measuring it. Across 2,463 configurations in seven domains, we show that stability and similarity are empirically uncorrelated ($ρ\approx 0.01$) and mechanistically distinct: similarity metrics collapse after removing the top principal components, while stability retains sensitivity to fine-grained manifold structure. This distinction yields actionable insights: for safety monitoring, stability acts as a functional geometric canary, detecting structural drift nearly 2$\times$ more sensitively than CKA while filtering out the non-functional noise that triggers false alarms in rigid distance metrics; for controllability, supervised stability predicts linear steerability ($ρ= 0.89$-$0.96$); for model selection, stability dissociates from transferability, revealing a geometric tax that transfer optimization incurs. Beyond machine learning, stability predicts CRISPR perturbation coherence and neural-behavioral coupling. By quantifying $how$ $reliably$ systems maintain structure, geometric stability provides a necessary complement to similarity for auditing representations across biological and computational systems.