Conditional inference trees (CIT) and conditional inference forests (CIF) reduce split-selection bias by testing features before choosing split thresholds, but repeated permutation tests and threshold searches can make these methods computationally expensive. We study CIT and CIF as top-$k$ feature-ranking methods for downstream prediction using real-data benchmarks, runtime ablations, and synthetic feature-recovery experiments. At a fixed node, if the features and permutation budget do not depend on the node responses, Bonferroni-corrected $+1$ Monte Carlo permutation $p$-values control nodewise rejection under the complete permutation null. CIF ranks 4th among 17 classification methods on 22 datasets and 3rd among 18 regression methods on 8 datasets. With Bonferroni correction held fixed, the CIF runtime ablations indicate that adaptive stopping and the number of thresholds searched have the largest measured effect on runtime: turning off adaptive stopping and using exact threshold search increase fitting time by 4.0--8.4$\times$ and 1.9--10.8$\times$, respectively, while downstream score changes are at most 0.011. Sparse high-$p$ simulations indicate that forest feature sampling can leave informative features out of many split decisions. Overall, the results support CIF as a top-$k$ feature-ranking method in the evaluated downstream prediction benchmarks.

Machine learning algorithms and their training datasets have grown substantially in both size and complexity over the past decade. This increased model complexity has made it challenging to interpret and predict their behavior in unobserved scenarios. Hence, many applications that involve societal decisions still rely on simple, interpretable models like linear regression, often after feature engineering. Examples of such applications include predicting national housing prices, estimating wages across industries, forecasting loan amounts across banks, predicting life insurance premiums across groups, and projecting energy consumption across communities [CGKMN24]. A shared safety and sometimes legal concern across the above applications is the potential for wildly different model qualities for different distributions, i.e., outputting a notably worse model for some source data distributions [Dat14; BS16; HPS16; VVB18; SBFVV19; BHJKR21; CGNSG23; Cho16; KLMR18; ADW19; CGKMN24; SVWZ24].

Conformal prediction and its variants, including the split conformal prediction, provide a distribution-free framework for uncertainty quantification by constructing prediction intervals or sets with finite-sample coverage guarantees. The statistical efficiency of these intervals depends critically on how the data are split into training and calibration samples. Despite its practical importance, a principled characterization of the training-calibration split that minimizes prediction interval length while maintaining coverage has remained largely unresolved. In this paper, we develop a theoretical framework for optimal data splitting in split conformal prediction. We first analyze the problem in a general setting and derive analytical characterizations of the length-optimal split ratio under both symmetric and asymmetric regimes. We then show how the general results specialize to several commonly used regression settings, including linear regression, nonparametric regression, and neural networks, thereby demonstrating the scope of the framework. We also describe a data-based method for selecting the optimal proportion. Our analysis clarifies how model-related features govern the optimal allocation of samples between training and calibration and provides principled guidance for constructing shorter prediction intervals. Experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate the applicability of the proposed methodology across a variety of practical scenarios.

A central challenge in statistical modeling is identifying the subset of features that belong in the true regression model. The classical best subset selection problem, recently made tractable via mixed-integer optimization (MIO), finds the globally optimal sparse solution. It does not, however, make use of any information beyond the observed data. In many applied settings, domain experts can meaningfully rank or score the relevance of candidate predictors, yet no existing framework integrates such probabilistic expert assessments directly into the best-subsets objective. This paper presents Expert-Implied Bayesian Best Subsets (EBBS), a method that incorporates domain-expert probability estimates of feature relevance into the MIO best-subsets problem through a maximum a posteriori (MAP) framework. Expert views from multiple respondents are aggregated into a single prior probability per feature using the Poisson binomial distribution for marginal probability estimates, the pairwise win rate for pairwise comparisons, or the normalized mean rank for ordinal rankings. This probability enters the objective function as a log-odds penalty term that smoothly encourages or discourages the selection of each feature consistent with the expert consensus. This paper provides analytic derivations of the MAP formulation and characterizes its theoretical properties. The proposed model reduces to Best Subsets when experts all have no views. Empirical results on synthetic and real datasets are forthcoming.

Modern multivariate regression problems involve several related outcomes whose regression effects are not only nonlinear, heterogeneous, and outcome-specific, but also where the residual dependence among outcomes is scientifically meaningful. Existing multivariate Bayesian tree-based methods typically address only part of this problem: some impose substantial sharing of tree architecture across outcomes, which is overly restrictive when responses depend on distinct predictors or effect modifiers, while others accommodate residual dependence but retain simpler mean structures. This paper develops multiVCBART, a multivariate varying-coefficient Bayesian additive regression tree framework that jointly models flexible outcome-specific coefficient surfaces and a sparse residual precision matrix. Each entry of the coefficient matrix $B(x)$ is represented by an independent BART ensemble, allowing predictor effects to vary nonlinearly with modifiers $x$ across outcomes, while a Graphical Horseshoe prior on the precision matrix $Ω$ captures parsimonious residual conditional dependence. To permit efficient computation, we introduce a sampler that reduces the multivariate Gaussian likelihood to a sequence of scalar pseudo-response updates, decoupling the tree backfitting from the Graphical Horseshoe step. Theoretically, we establish the first posterior contraction rates for a multivariate BART model with jointly estimated residual dependence, proving near-minimax adaptation to underlying smoothness and structural sparsity. Empirically, multiVCBART outperforms existing multivariate tree models and Bayesian SUR competitors on sparse, high-dimensional datasets. Finally, in a re-analysis of the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer dataset, our method identifies distinct biomarker signals and recovers a coherent residual pharmacologic network.

Uncertainty estimates in machine learning are typically evaluated using generic metrics such as the negative log-likelihood and expected calibration error, yet good performance on such metrics does not necessarily imply high utility in downstream decisions. We introduce decision-alignment, a criterion that reveals which evaluation metrics meaningfully align with downstream utilities. Applying this framework, we show that many widely used uncertainty metrics are either misaligned with common decision problems or encode pathological prior beliefs about the downstream task. We then propose prior-weighted utility metrics, a special class of proper scoring rules that provides decision-aligned uncertainty evaluation. Across benchmark experiments and real-world case studies, our metrics consistently align with realized decision utility, while conventional metrics do not. Our results surface flaws in the current UQ evaluation protocol and offer a principled extension of existing metrics toward decision-relevant UQ evaluation.

Textual data are often collected alongside structured response variables, but prediction and interpretation are commonly treated as separate tasks. This paper studies rating prediction as an initial case of interpretable text-response modelling, where the aim is to learn textual representations that are both semantically meaningful and aligned with an external response. We propose a joint non-negative matrix factorisation and binomial regression model, in which the document-topic representation is learned from both text reconstruction and rating prediction. Simulation experiments and a real-world review dataset show that the model can recover stable response-relevant textual signals and achieve competitive performance against linear and ridge regression baselines. The framework provides a practical step towards interpretable modelling of text-linked outcomes, with potential extensions to other response types beyond bounded ratings.

Visual assessment of residual plots is a common approach for diagnosing linear models, but it relies on manual evaluation, which does not scale well and can lead to inconsistent decisions across analysts. The lineup protocol, which embeds the observed plot among null plots, can reduce subjectivity but requires even more human effort. In today's data-driven world, such tasks are well suited for automation. We present a new R package that uses a computer vision model to automate the evaluation of residual plots. An accompanying Shiny application is provided for ease of use. Given a sample of residuals, the model predicts a visual signal strength (VSS) and offers supporting information to help analysts assess model fit.

AI-assisted interviews promise to reduce respondent burden in surveys by allowing respondents to describe experiences naturally while an AI system noisily maps those accounts into structured survey variables. That mapping is a measurement process that is fallible, versioned, adaptive, and potentially behaves differently across subgroups. This paper proposes Adaptive Matrix Validation (AMV), a design in which each respondent completes an AI-assisted interview, which is then mapped into tabular data by the AI. Respondents are also asked a small, randomized set of structured questions, which are used for statistical adjustment. The estimator first calibrates the mapped values using validation answers from other respondents, then corrects the remaining error with the validation answers observed for the target respondent. The paper develops estimators for item means, subgroup estimates, and regression coefficients when outcomes, predictors, or both are mapped from interviews. It also gives planning formulas the number of validation questions required and the sample size. A design-calibration simulation, an American Time Use Survey emulation, and a CHAMPS verbal-autopsy narrative study show when sparse validation can improve precision and when it cannot

Counterfactual inference aims to estimate the counterfactual outcome at the individual level given knowledge of an observed treatment and the factual outcome, with broad applications in fields such as epidemiology, econometrics, and management science. Previous methods rely on a known structural causal model (SCM) or assume the homogeneity of the exogenous variable and strict monotonicity between the outcome and exogenous variable. In this paper, we propose a principled approach for identifying and estimating the counterfactual outcome. We first introduce a simple and intuitive rank preservation assumption to identify the counterfactual outcome without relying on a known structural causal model. Building on this, we propose a novel ideal loss for theoretically unbiased learning of the counterfactual outcome and further develop a kernel-based estimator for its empirical estimation. Our theoretical analysis shows that the rank preservation assumption is not stronger than the homogeneity and strict monotonicity assumptions, and shows that the proposed ideal loss is convex, and the proposed estimator is unbiased. Extensive semi-synthetic and real-world experiments are conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.