In randomized trials involving multiple treatments, bivariate survival outcomes present significant analytical challenges for making decisions. This paper addresses the problem of deriving optimal individualized treatment rules to maximize the joint survival probability beyond fixed time points $(t_1, t_2)$ through deep neural networks, while accounting for right censoring. We propose a novel approach that models treatment rules via stochastic policies, coupling marginal accelerated failure time models via link function to capture bivariate dependence. To enhance robustness and effectiveness of decision making, we introduce an adaptive prediction-powered method that leverages auxiliary predictions from machine learning models.

Deep neural networks (DNNs) have achieved remarkable empirical success, yet their training dynamics remain understood mainly from optimization rather than statistical principles. Here we develop a statistical framework for DNN training in the over-parameterized regime by showing that the prediction induced by continuous-time neural tangent kernel (NTK) gradient flow is exactly equivalent to that from a classical random-effects model. In this framework, training time acts as a variance component, or equivalently an empirical Bayes covariance hyperparameter, governing the allocation of variation from noise to structured signal. This equivalence reveals an optimization-inference duality: the gradient-flow path is both an optimization trajectory and an empirical Bayes random-effects inference path. Conditional on training time, the network output is the posterior mean of the latent signal, and estimating training time by restricted maximum likelihood (REML) turns early stopping into likelihood-based empirical Bayes inference rather than external tuning. This perspective yields a two-stage inferential procedure. First, a variance-component test determines whether DNN training captures statistically significant structure beyond initialization. Second, conditional on training being warranted, REML provides a likelihood-based early stopping rule. The resulting stopping time admits a spectral interpretation in the NTK eigenbasis, where training proceeds until spectral loss decorrelation is achieved. We further establish that REML-guided early stopping achieves asymptotically optimal prediction error for fixed-design in-sample prediction and, under additional random-design regularity conditions, for out-of-sample prediction. This work reframes DNN training as statistical inference and provides a principled foundation for deciding whether and how long to train deep neural networks.

Low-dimensional embeddings are widely used as visual summaries of high-dimensional data and to enable downstream scientific discoveries. Yet, popular nonlinear dimension reduction methods, such as t-SNE and UMAP, are often selected based on visual appeal alone and without rigorous quantitative validation. A major reason is that manifold embeddings typically do not provide an out-of-sample map nor an inverse back to the original feature space; this makes held-out validation, the gold standard in supervised learning, all but impossible. To address these challenges, we develop a novel framework, MEDAL (Manifold Embedding Distillation via Autoencoder Learning), which distills a fitted manifold embedding into a reusable encoder--decoder model. MEDAL trains a constrained autoencoder whose bottleneck exactly matches any teacher embedding while the decoder reconstructs the original input; this yields an explicit map for new samples, an approximate inverse, and a pointwise reconstruction-based measure of distortion in the manifold space. This converts static manifold embeddings into models that can be evaluated on held-out data, enabling quantitative validation including comparing different dimension reduction methods as well as hyperparameter tuning. Across multiple benchmark and scientific case studies, we show that MEDAL enables held-out validation to determine optimal manifold embeddings and hyperparameters, reveals biologically coherent regions that are difficult to preserve in two dimensional embeddings, and detects distribution shift when new samples are mapped into a fixed reference manifold. MEDAL provides a general validation wrapper to any existing dimension reduction technique that will improve the rigor and

Model-assisted interval designs such as the Keyboard design are transparent and easy to implement in phase I oncology trials. However, interim decisions based solely on data from the current dose may overlook informative signals from neighbouring doses, leading to unnecessary escalation or de-escalation. We propose the shared Keyboard design, a Bayesian model-assisted design that replaces the independent beta--binomial updating scheme at each dose with a posterior induced by a Beta kernel process using kernel-weighted pseudo-counts. The design preserves the decision structure of the Keyboard design while enabling controlled borrowing across nearby doses. To prioritise overdose control, we propose an asymmetric kernel that assigns greater weight to toxicities observed at higher doses during escalation. We further extend the proposed design to accommodate adaptive dose insertion when the initial dose grid is inadequate and time-to-event outcomes when late-onset toxicities are present. Extensive simulation studies demonstrate substantial improvements in both accuracy and safety for identifying the maximum tolerated dose. In settings involving dose insertion, the proposed design identifies inserted target doses more effectively than adaptive dose modification while maintaining a comparable modification rate.

Integrating multimodal datasets in clinical oncology is frequently hindered by high dimensionality and blockwise missingness, where entire data sources are unavailable for specific patient subsets. Standard survival models often struggle with these gaps, leading to biased results or patient exclusion. We introduce Multimodality Stacking with Blockwise missing values (MSB), a late-fusion framework for survival analysis that independently models modality-specific features before aggregating predictions via a cross-validated stacking meta-learner. MSB was validated on the PIONeeR study (n=443 patients, 378 biomarkers across eight heterogeneous sources) to predict progression-free survival in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving immunotherapy. MSB yielded higher predictive performance (C-index) than baseline algorithms. Improvements varied by baseline strength: linear models showed a 15.9% increase (p<0.001 for the Wilcoxon signed-rank test), random survival forests gained 5.4% (p=0.002), and gradient boosting methods improved by 2.1% (p=0.030). Beyond discrimination, MSB reduced the generalization gap (train-test difference in 5 folds cross-validation repeated 3 times: 0.055 vs 0.380 for linear models). Permutation importance analysis identified routine laboratory markers, clinical features, and PD-L1 expression as primary predictive drivers. Missing block indicators showed negligible importance, suggesting the model learned from biomarker values rather than data availability patterns. MSB provides a statistically validated framework for multimodal survival prediction with blockwise missingness. By enabling systematic biomarker evaluation without requiring complete data, MSB offers a practical tool for predictive modeling in biomedical research, pending external validation. Implementation is available at https://github.com/MohamedBoussena/MSB under Inria license.

Reinforcement learning algorithms are generally designed to maximize the expected return across a population. However, a policy that is optimal on average may be suboptimal for certain individuals, leading to potential safety concerns. To address this, we first formalize the notion of individual harm from a counterfactual perspective and define harm as the event in which a chosen action results in a strictly worse outcome than a baseline alternative. We then propose a general two-stage procedure for learning policies that maximize the expected return while accounting for individual harm. We further establish the finite-sample properties of the learned policy, derive an upper bound on its sub-optimality gap, and show that the harm rate remains well-controlled. Numerical experiments on both simulated and real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

Graph Neural Networks (GNN) are currently the most popular approach for learning and prediction on graph-structured data and are deployed in various fields, from social network analysis to drug discovery. However, there is limited mathematical understanding of the performance of GNNs. We discuss the various perspectives used to study statistical generalisation in GNNs. We identify three broad frameworks. The first approach, rooted in learning theory, relies on uniform convergence bounds and the complexity of the hypothesis class of specific GNN architectures. This approach also builds on the expressivity of GNNs, typically studied through the lens of graph isomorphism tests. The second principle is to simplify the neural architecture by analysing GNNs under the asymptotics of infinitely many parameters or infinite graph size. This approach approximates GNNs using Gaussian processes, neural tangent kernels or graphon neural network operators, which allow studying the generalisation or stability of trained GNNs. The third framework studies GNNs under random graph models, often the contextual stochastic block model, and derives non-asymptotic error rates using tools from high-dimensional statistics. We highlight some key theoretical results and discuss a few limitations and open research questions for each perspective.

In multi-modal biomedical research, integrating high-dimensional genomic data with clinical baselines is essential for precision medicine. However, standard deep neural network approaches often entangle these modalities, obscuring the specific predictive impact of genetic features and leading to possibly suboptimal predictive performance. Motivated by the landmark METABRIC cohort primary breast tumors study, we propose the Stein-Encoder, a white-box supervised framework designed to isolate the genetic signal driving clinical outcomes conditional on nuisance covariates. By leveraging Stein's method and residualization techniques, our approach constructs an interpretable single index that summarizes relevant biological heterogeneity while flexibly incorporating clinical factors and can be used to improve downstream prediction. We establish theoretical guarantees for identification, consistency and efficiency improvement. Applied to the METABRIC cohort, the Stein-Encoder outperforms unsupervised benchmarks in predictive accuracy. Crucially, it achieves structural disentanglement by revealing response-specific biological mechanisms: we find that tumor size is driven primarily by mitotic networks, whereas prognostic indices rely on a distinct proliferation-versus-immune axis. This work contributes a unified, computationally efficient framework that bridges statistical rigor with the representational power of neural networks, enabling interpretable, task-specific and efficient compression of multi-modal health data for a wide range of precision medicine applications, beyond biomarker discovery.

Bayesian optimal experimental design (BOED) selects experiments to maximize information gain about model parameters. However, in decision-critical settings, reducing parameter uncertainty does not necessarily improve downstream decisions, as only specific parameter directions relevant to the objective truly matter. We propose GoBOED, a goal-driven BOED framework that directly optimizes experimental designs for a specified decision-making objective. GoBOED combines an amortized variational posterior surrogate with a differentiable convex decision layer, enabling gradient-based design optimization that is fully decision-focused. We theoretically show that GoBOED gradients are insensitive to parameter directions irrelevant to the decision objective, providing a formal justification for why goal-driven design achieves equivalent decision quality over a wider set of experimental designs than information-gain maximization. Empirically, across source localization, epidemic management, and pharmacokinetic control, GoBOED identifies designs that better align with downstream decision objectives and reveals that near-optimal design windows are substantially wider than those predicted by goal-agnostic BOED approaches.

In the era of precision medicine, genome-wide epigenetic modifications offer rich data that could inform risk prediction. However, these data are high-dimensional and exhibit complex dependence structures, which makes it difficult to jointly model them with low-dimensional covariates when the goal is to obtain interpretable effect estimates for covariate adjustment. Standard Bayesian additive regression trees (BART) provide strong predictive performance but treat all predictors uniformly within the tree ensemble, obscuring the contributions of significant covariates and complicating variable selection in high-dimensional settings. We propose a semi-parametric BART model (spBART) that addresses this limitation by modeling low-dimensional covariates through a parametric component with interpretable coefficients, while capturing complex nonlinear associations among high-dimensional predictors through the tree ensemble. To perform stable variable selection, we develop a cross-validation-based procedure that aggregates posterior inclusion probabilities across folds and applies Bayesian false discovery rate control. We apply the proposed method to a pooled case--control analysis of high-dimensional genome-wide 5-hydroxymethylcytosine profiles derived from circulating cell-free DNA in two multiple myeloma studies ($N = 869$). The approach identifies a parsimonious set of candidate loci and achieves strong out-of-sample discrimination (AUC $= 0.96$) in a held-out validation set. Overall, spBART provides a unified framework for combining interpretable covariate inference with flexible modeling and variable selection in high-dimensional biomedical studies.