With the advent of wearable recorders, scientists are increasingly turning to automated methods of analysis of audio and video data in order to measure children's experience, behavior, and outcomes, with a sizable literature employing long-form audio-recordings to study language acquisition. While numerous articles report on the accuracy and reliability of the most popular automated classifiers, less has been written on the downstream effects of classification errors on measurements and statistical inferences (e.g., the estimate of correlations and effect sizes in regressions). This paper proposes a Bayesian approach to study the effects of algorithmic errors on key scientific questions, including the effect of siblings on children's language experience and the association between children's production and their input. In both the most commonly used \gls{lena}, and an open-source alternative (the Voice Type Classifier from the ACLEW system), we find that classification errors can significantly distort estimates. For instance, automated annotations underestimated the negative effect of siblings on adult input by 20--80\%, potentially placing it below statistical significance thresholds. We further show that a Bayesian calibration approach for recovering unbiased estimates of effect sizes can be effective and insightful, but does not provide a fool-proof solution. Both the issue reported and our solution may apply to any classifier involving event detection and classification with non-zero error rates.

In a classic paper, Conant and Ashby claimed that "every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system." Artificial Life has produced many examples of systems that perform tasks with apparently no model in sight; these suggest Conant and Ashby's theorem doesn't easily generalise beyond its restricted setup. Nevertheless, here we show that a similar intuition can be fleshed out in a different way: whenever an agent is able to perform a regulation task, it is possible for an observer to interpret it as having "beliefs" about its environment, which it "updates" in response to sensory input. This notion of belief updating provides a notion of model that is more sophisticated than Conant and Ashby's, as well as a theorem that is more broadly applicable. However, it necessitates a change in perspective, in that the observer plays an essential role in the theory: models are not a mere property of the system but are imposed on it from outside. Our theorem holds regardless of whether the system is regulating its environment in a classic control theory setup, or whether it's regulating its own internal state; the model is of its environment either way. The model might be trivial, however, and this is how the apparent counterexamples are resolved.

Distribution shift, a change in the statistical properties of data over time, poses a critical challenge for deep learning anomaly detection systems. Existing anomaly detection systems often struggle to adapt to these shifts. Specifically, systems based on supervised learning require costly manual labeling, while those based on unsupervised learning rely on clean data, which is difficult to obtain, for shift adaptation. Both of these requirements are challenging to meet in practice. In this paper, we introduce NetSight, a framework for supervised anomaly detection in network data that continually detects and adapts to distribution shifts in an online manner. NetSight eliminates manual intervention through a novel pseudo-labeling technique and uses a knowledge distillation-based adaptation strategy to prevent catastrophic forgetting. Evaluated on three long-term network datasets, NetSight demonstrates superior adaptation performance compared to state-of-the-art methods that rely on manual labeling, achieving F1-score improvements of up to 11.72%. This proves its robustness and effectiveness in dynamic networks that experience distribution shifts over time.

Extracting meaning from uncertain, noisy data is a fundamental problem across time series analysis, pattern recognition, and language modeling. This survey presents a unified mathematical framework that connects classical estimation theory, statistical inference, and modern machine learning, including deep learning and large language models. By analyzing how techniques such as maximum likelihood estimation, Bayesian inference, and attention mechanisms address uncertainty, the paper illustrates that many AI methods are rooted in shared probabilistic principles. Through illustrative scenarios including system identification, image classification, and language generation, we show how increasingly complex models build upon these foundations to tackle practical challenges like overfitting, data sparsity, and interpretability. In other words, the work demonstrates that maximum likelihood, MAP estimation, Bayesian classification, and deep learning all represent different facets of a shared goal: inferring hidden causes from noisy and/or biased observations. It serves as both a theoretical synthesis and a practical guide for students and researchers navigating the evolving landscape of machine learning.

Embodied navigation (EN) advances traditional navigation by enabling robots to perform complex egocentric tasks through sensing, social, and motion intelligence. In contrast to classic methodologies that rely on explicit localization and pre-defined maps, EN leverages egocentric perception and human-like interaction strategies. This survey introduces a comprehensive EN formulation structured into five stages: Transition, Observation, Fusion, Reward-policy construction, and Action (TOFRA). The TOFRA framework serves to synthesize the current state of the art, provide a critical review of relevant platforms and evaluation metrics, and identify critical open research challenges. A list of studies is available at https://github.com/Franky-X/Awesome-Embodied-Navigation.

Bayesian optimization is a methodology to optimize black-box functions.

Similarity choice data occur when humans make choices among alternatives based on their similarity to a target, e.g., in the context of information retrieval and in embedding learning settings. Classical metric-based models of similarity choice assume independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA), a property that allows for a simpler formulation. While IIA violations have been detected in many discrete choice settings, the similarity choice setting has received scant attention. This is because the target-dependent nature of the choice complicates IIA testing. We propose two statistical methods to test for IIA: a classical goodness-of-fit test and a Bayesian counterpart based on the framework of Posterior Predictive Checks (PPC). This Bayesian approach, our main technical contribution, quantifies the degree of IIA violation beyond its mere significance. We curate two datasets: one with choice sets designed to elicit IIA violations, and another with randomly generated choice sets from the same item universe. Our tests confirmed significant IIA violations on both datasets, and notably, we find a comparable degree of violation between them. Further, we devise a new PPC test for population homogeneity. Results show that the population is indeed homogenous, suggesting that the IIA violations are driven by context effects -- specifically, interactions within the choice sets. These results highlight the need for new similarity choice models that account for such context effects.

High-resolution estimates of population health indicators are critical for precision public health. We propose a method for high-resolution estimation that fuses distinct data sources: an unbiased, low-resolution data source (e.g. aggregated administrative data) and a potentially biased, high-resolution data source (e.g. individual-level online survey responses). We assume that the potentially biased, high-resolution data source is generated from the population under a model of sampling bias where observables can have arbitrary impact on the probability of response but the difference in the log probabilities of response between units with the same observables is linear in the difference between sufficient statistics of their observables and outcomes. Our data fusion method learns a distribution that is closest (in the sense of KL divergence) to the online survey distribution and consistent with the aggregated administrative data and our model of sampling bias. This method outperforms baselines that rely on either data source alone on a testbed that includes repeated measurements of three indicators measured by both the (online) Household Pulse Survey and ground-truth data sources at two geographic resolutions over the same time period.

Fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) with low-rank adaptaion (LoRA) is a cost-effective way to incorporate information from a specific dataset. However, it is often unclear how well the fine-tuned LLM will generalize, i.e., how well it will perform on unseen datasets. Methods have been proposed to improve generalization by optimizing with in-context prompts, or by using meta-learning to fine-tune LLMs. However, these methods are expensive in memory and computation, requiring either long-context prompts or saving copies of parameters and using second-order gradient updates. To address these challenges, we propose Amortized Bayesian Meta-Learning for LoRA (ABMLL). This method builds on amortized Bayesian meta-learning for smaller models, adapting this approach to LLMs while maintaining its computational efficiency. We reframe task-specific and global parameters in the context of LoRA and use a set of new hyperparameters to balance reconstruction accuracy and the fidelity of task-specific parameters to the global ones. ABMLL provides effective generalization and scales to large models such as Llama3-8B. Furthermore, as a result of using a Bayesian framework, ABMLL provides improved uncertainty quantification. We test ABMLL on Unified-QA and CrossFit datasets and find that it outperforms existing methods on these benchmarks in terms of both accuracy and expected calibration error.