We study semisupervised mean estimation with a small labeled sample, a large unlabeled sample, and a black-box prediction model whose output may be miscalibrated. A standard approach in this setting is augmented inverse-probability weighting (AIPW) [Robins et al., 1994], which protects against prediction-model misspecification but can be inefficient when the prediction score is poorly aligned with the outcome scale. We introduce Calibrated Prediction-Powered Inference, which post-hoc calibrates the prediction score on the labeled sample before using it for semisupervised estimation. This simple step requires no retraining and can improve the original score both as a predictor of the outcome and as a regression adjustment for semisupervised inference. We study both linear and isotonic calibration. For isotonic calibration, we establish first-order optimality guarantees: isotonic post-processing can improve predictive accuracy and estimator efficiency relative to the original score and simpler post-processing rules, while no further post-processing of the fitted isotonic score yields additional first-order gains. For linear calibration, we show first-order equivalence to PPI++. We also clarify the relationship among existing estimators, showing that the original PPI estimator is a special case of AIPW and can be inefficient when the prediction model is accurate, while PPI++ is AIPW with empirical efficiency maximization [Rubin et al., 2008]. In simulations and real-data experiments, our calibrated estimators often outperform PPI and are competitive with, or outperform, AIPW and PPI++. We provide an accompanying Python package, ppi_aipw, at https://larsvanderlaan.github.io/ppi-aipw/.

We introduce Prior-Fitted Functional Flows, a generative foundation model for pharmacokinetics that enables zero-shot population synthesis and individual forecasting without manual parameter tuning. We learn functional vector fields, explicitly conditioned on the sparse, irregular data of an entire study population. This enables the generation of coherent virtual cohorts as well as forecasting of partially observed patient trajectories with calibrated uncertainty. We construct a new open-access literature corpus to inform our priors, and demonstrate state-of-the-art predictive accuracy on extensive real-world datasets.

Selection bias arises when the probability that an observation enters a dataset depends on variables related to the quantities of interest, leading to systematic distortions in estimation and uncertainty quantification. For example, in epidemiological or survey settings, individuals with certain outcomes may be more likely to be included, resulting in biased prevalence estimates with potentially substantial downstream impact. Classical corrections, such as inverse-probability weighting or explicit likelihood-based models of the selection process, rely on tractable likelihoods, which limits their applicability in complex stochastic models with latent dynamics or high-dimensional structure. Simulation-based inference enables Bayesian analysis without tractable likelihoods but typically assumes missingness at random and thus fails when selection depends on unobserved outcomes or covariates. Here, we develop a bias-aware simulation-based inference framework that explicitly incorporates selection into neural posterior estimation. By embedding the selection mechanism directly into the generative simulator, the approach enables amortized Bayesian inference without requiring tractable likelihoods. This recasting of selection bias as part of the simulation process allows us to both obtain debiased estimates and explicitly test for the presence of bias. The framework integrates diagnostics to detect discrepancies between simulated and observed data and to assess posterior calibration. The method recovers well-calibrated posterior distributions across three statistical applications with diverse selection mechanisms, including settings in which likelihood-based approaches yield biased estimates. These results recast the correction of selection bias as a simulation problem and establish simulation-based inference as a practical and testable strategy for parameter estimation under selection bias.

Converting betting odds into accurate outcome probabilities is a fundamental challenge in order to use betting odds as a benchmark for sports forecasting and market efficiency analysis. In this study, we propose two methods to overcome the limitations of existing conversion methods. Firstly, we propose an odds-only method to convert betting odds to probabilities without using historical data for model fitting. While existing odds-only methods, such as Multiplicative, Shin, and Power exist, they do not adjust for biases or relationships we found in our betting odds dataset, which consists of 90014 football matches across five different bookmakers. To overcome these limitations, our proposed Odds-Only-Equal-Profitability-Confidence (OO-EPC) method aligns with the bookmakers' pricing objectives of having equal confidence in profitability for each outcome. We provide empirical evidence from our betting odds dataset that, for the majority of bookmakers, our proposed OO-EPC method outperforms the existing odds-only methods. Beyond controlled experiments, we applied the OO-EPC method under real-world uncertainty by using it for six iterations of an annual basketball outcome forecasting competition. Secondly, we propose a generalised linear model that utilises historical data for model fitting and then converts betting odds to probabilities. Existing generalised linear models attempt to capture relationships that the Efficient Market Hypothesis already captures. To overcome this shortcoming, our proposed Favourite-Longshot-Bias-Adjusted Generalised Linear Model (FL-GLM) fits just one parameter to capture the favourite-longshot bias, providing a more interpretable alternative. We provide empirical evidence from historical football matches where, for all bookmakers, our proposed FL-GLM outperforms the existing multinomial and logistic generalised linear models.

In variety testing, multi-environment trials (MET) are essential for evaluating the genotypic performance of crop plants. A persistent challenge in the statistical analysis of MET data is the estimation of variance components, which are often still inaccurately estimated or shrunk to exactly zero when using residual (restricted) maximum likelihood (REML) approaches. At the same time, institutions conducting MET typically possess extensive historical data that can, in principle, be leveraged to improve variance component estimation. However, these data are rarely incorporated sufficiently. The purpose of this paper is to address this gap by proposing a Bayesian framework that systematically integrates historical information to stabilize variance component estimation and better quantify uncertainty. Our Bayesian linear mixed model (BLMM) reformulation uses priors and Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods to maintain the variance components as positive, yielding more realistic distributional estimates. Furthermore, our model incorporates historical prior information by managing MET data in successive historical data windows. Variance component prior and posterior distributions are shown to be conjugate and belong to the inverse gamma and inverse Wishart families. While Bayesian methodology is increasingly being used for analyzing MET data, to the best of our knowledge, this study comprises one of the first serious attempts to objectively inform priors in the context of MET data. This refers to the proposed Bayesian updating approach. To demonstrate the framework, we consider an application where posterior variance component samples are plugged into an A-optimality experimental design criterion to determine the average optimal allocations of trials to agro-ecological zones in a sub-divided target population of environments (TPE).

Adaptive specification search generates statistically significant backtests even under martingale-difference nulls. We introduce a falsification audit testing complete predictive workflows against synthetic reference classes, including zero-predictability environments and microstructure placebos. Workflows generating significant walk-forward evidence in these environments are falsified. For passing workflows, we quantify selection-induced performance inflation using an absolute magnitude gap linking optimized in-sample evidence to disjoint walk-forward realizations, adjusted for effective multiplicity. Simulations validate extreme-value scaling under correlated searches and demonstrate detection power under genuine structure. Empirical case studies confirm that many apparent findings represent methodological artifacts rather than genuine predictability.

Synthetic augmentation is increasingly used to mitigate data scarcity in financial machine learning, yet its statistical role remains poorly understood. We formalize synthetic augmentation as a modification of the effective training distribution and show that it induces a structural bias--variance trade-off: while additional samples may reduce estimation error, they may also shift the population objective whenever the synthetic distribution deviates from regions relevant under evaluation. To isolate informational gains from mechanical sample-size effects, we introduce a size-matched null augmentation and a finite-sample, non-parametric block permutation test that remains valid under weak temporal dependence. We evaluate this framework in both controlled Markov-switching environments and real financial datasets, including high-frequency option trade data and a daily equity panel. Across generators spanning bootstrap, copula-based models, variational autoencoders, diffusion models, and TimeGAN, we vary augmentation ratio, model capacity, task type, regime rarity, and signal-to-noise. We show that synthetic augmentation is beneficial only in variance-dominant regimes, such as persistent volatility forecasting-while it deteriorates performance in bias-dominant settings, including near-efficient directional prediction. Rare-regime targeting can improve domain-specific metrics but may conflict with unconditional permutation inference. Our results provide a structural perspective on when synthetic data improves financial learning performance and when it induces persistent distributional distortion.

Data-driven operations management often relies on parameters estimated from costly human-generated labels. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) and other AI systems offer inexpensive auxiliary data, but introduce a new challenge: AI outputs are not direct observations of the target outcomes, but could involve high-dimensional representations with complex and unknown relationships to human labels. Conventional methods leverage AI predictions as direct proxies for true labels, which can be inefficient or unreliable when this relationship is weak or misspecified. We propose Generative Augmented Inference (GAI), a general framework that incorporates AI-generated outputs as informative features for estimating models of human-labeled outcomes. GAI uses an orthogonal moment construction that enables consistent estimation and valid inference with flexible, nonparametric relationship between LLM-generated outputs and human labels. We establish asymptotic normality and show a "safe default" property: relative to human-data-only estimators, GAI weakly improves estimation efficiency under arbitrary auxiliary signals and yields strict gains whenever the auxiliary information is predictive. Empirically, GAI outperforms benchmarks across diverse settings. In conjoint analysis with weak auxiliary signals, GAI reduces estimation error by about 50% and lowers human labeling requirements by over 75%. In retail pricing, where all methods access the same auxiliary inputs, GAI consistently outperforms alternative estimators, highlighting the value of its construction rather than differences in information. In health insurance choice, it cuts labeling requirements by over 90% while maintaining decision accuracy. Across applications, GAI improves confidence interval coverage without inflating width. Overall, GAI provides a principled and scalable approach to integrating AI-generated information.

Pain killers seem to work on lobsters, so being boiled alive may be just as gruesome as it sounds. More information Adding us as a Preferred Source in Google by using this link indicates that you would like to see more of our content in Google News results. A growing body of research suggests that the crustaceans can feel pain. Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent six days a week. When it's time to cook a lobster, the crustaceans are infamously boiled alive.

Clinical decision-making often involves selecting tests that are costly, invasive, or time-consuming, motivating individualized, sequential strategies for what to measure and when to stop ascertaining. We study the problem of learning cost-optimal sequential decision policies from retrospective data, where test availability depends on prior results, inducing informative missingness. Under a sequential missing-at-random mechanism, we develop a doubly robust Q-learning framework for estimating optimal policies. The method introduces path-specific inverse probability weights that account for heterogeneous test trajectories and satisfy a normalization property conditional on the observed history. By combining these weights with auxiliary contrast models, we construct orthogonal pseudo-outcomes that enable unbiased policy learning when either the acquisition model or the contrast model is correctly specified. We establish oracle inequalities for the stage-wise contrast estimators, along with convergence rates, regret bounds, and misclassification rates for the learned policy. Simulations demonstrate improved cost-adjusted performance over weighted and complete-case baselines, and an application to a prostate cancer cohort study illustrates how the method reduces testing cost without compromising predictive accuracy.