Computing $\log\det(A)$ for large symmetric positive definite matrices arises in Gaussian process inference and Bayesian model comparison. Standard methods combine matrix-vector products with polynomial approximations. We study a different model: access to trace powers $p_k = \tr(A^k)$, natural when matrix powers are available. Classical moment-based approximations Taylor-expand $\log(λ)$ around the arithmetic mean. This requires $|λ- \AM| < \AM$ and diverges when $κ> 4$. We work instead with the moment-generating function $M(t) = \E[X^t]$ for normalized eigenvalues $X = λ/\AM$. Since $M'(0) = \E[\log X]$, the log-determinant becomes $\log\det(A) = n(\log \AM + M'(0))$ -- the problem reduces to estimating a derivative at $t = 0$. Trace powers give $M(k)$ at positive integers, but interpolating $M(t)$ directly is ill-conditioned due to exponential growth. The transform $K(t) = \log M(t)$ compresses this range. Normalization by $\AM$ ensures $K(0) = K(1) = 0$. With these anchors fixed, we interpolate $K$ through $m+1$ consecutive integers and differentiate to estimate $K'(0)$. However, this local interpolation cannot capture arbitrary spectral features. We prove a fundamental limit: no continuous estimator using finitely many positive moments can be uniformly accurate over unbounded conditioning. Positive moments downweight the spectral tail; $K'(0) = \E[\log X]$ is tail-sensitive. This motivates guaranteed bounds. From the same traces we derive upper bounds on $(\det A)^{1/n}$. Given a spectral floor $r \leq λ_{\min}$, we obtain moment-constrained lower bounds, yielding a provable interval for $\log\det(A)$. A gap diagnostic indicates when to trust the point estimate and when to report bounds. All estimators and bounds cost $O(m)$, independent of $n$. For $m \in \{4, \ldots, 8\}$, this is effectively constant time.

Real-world tabular databases routinely combine continuous measurements and categorical records, yet missing entries are pervasive and can distort downstream analysis. We propose Statistical-Neural Interaction (SNI), an interpretable mixed-type imputation framework that couples correlation-derived statistical priors with neural feature attention through a Controllable-Prior Feature Attention (CPFA) module. CPFA learns head-wise prior-strength coefficients $\{λ_h\}$ that softly regularize attention toward the prior while allowing data-driven deviations when nonlinear patterns appear to be present in the data. Beyond imputation, SNI aggregates attention maps into a directed feature-dependency matrix that summarizes which variables the imputer relied on, without requiring post-hoc explainers. We evaluate SNI against six baselines (Mean/Mode, MICE, KNN, MissForest, GAIN, MIWAE) on six datasets spanning ICU monitoring, population surveys, socio-economic statistics, and engineering applications. Under MCAR/strict-MAR at 30\% missingness, SNI is generally competitive on continuous metrics but is often outperformed by accuracy-first baselines (MissForest, MIWAE) on categorical variables; in return, it provides intrinsic dependency diagnostics and explicit statistical-neural trade-off parameters. We additionally report MNAR stress tests (with a mask-aware variant) and discuss computational cost, limitations -- particularly for severely imbalanced categorical targets -- and deployment scenarios where interpretability may justify the trade-off.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in economics as predictive tools--both to generate synthetic responses in place of human subjects (Horton, 2023; Anthis et al., 2025), and to forecast economic outcomes directly (Hewitt et al., 2024a; Faria-e Castro and Leibovici, 2024; Chan-Lau et al., 2025). Their appeal in these roles is obvious: A pretrained LLM embeds a vast amount of information and can be deployed at negligible cost, often in settings where collecting new, domain-specific human data would be expensive or infeasible. What remains unclear is how to assess the quality of these predictions. This paper proposes a measure that quantifies the domain-specific value of LLMs in an interpretable unit: the amount of human data they substitute for. Specifically, we ask how much human data would be required for a conventional model trained on that data to match the predictive performance of the pretrained LLM in that domain.

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.

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.

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.