Gaussian processes (GPs) are widely used as surrogate models for complicated functions in scientific and engineering applications. In many cases, prior knowledge about the function to be approximated, such as monotonicity, is available and can be leveraged to improve model fidelity. Incorporating such constraints into GP models enhances predictive accuracy and reduces uncertainty, but remains a computationally challenging task for high-dimensional problems. In this work, we present a novel virtual point-based framework for building constrained GP models under monotonicity constraints, based on regularized linear randomize-then-optimize (RLRTO), which enables efficient sampling from a constrained posterior distribution by means of solving randomized optimization problems. We also enhance two existing virtual point-based approaches by replacing Gibbs sampling with the No U-Turn Sampler (NUTS) for improved efficiency. A Python implementation of these methods is provided and can be easily applied to a wide range of problems. This implementation is then used to validate the approaches on approximating a range of synthetic functions, demonstrating comparable predictive performance between all considered methods and significant improvements in computational efficiency with the two NUTS methods and especially with the RLRTO method. The framework is further applied to construct surrogate models for systems of differential equations.

Prediction uncertainty quantification is a key research topic in recent years scientific and business problems. In insurance industries (\cite{parodi2023pricing}), assessing the range of possible claim costs for individual drivers improves premium pricing accuracy. It also enables insurers to manage risk more effectively by accounting for uncertainty in accident likelihood and severity. In the presence of covariates, a variety of regression-type models are often used for modeling insurance claims, ranging from relatively simple generalized linear models (GLMs) to regularized GLMs to gradient boosting models (GBMs). Conformal predictive inference has arisen as a popular distribution-free approach for quantifying predictive uncertainty under relatively weak assumptions of exchangeability, and has been well studied under the classic linear regression setting. In this work, we propose new non-conformity measures for GLMs and GBMs with GLM-type loss. Using regularized Tweedie GLM regression and LightGBM with Tweedie loss, we demonstrate conformal prediction performance with these non-conformity measures in insurance claims data. Our simulation results favor the use of locally weighted Pearson residuals for LightGBM over other methods considered, as the resulting intervals maintained the nominal coverage with the smallest average width.

Closed-loop learning is the process of repeatedly estimating a model from data generated from the model itself. It is receiving great attention due to the possibility that large neural network models may, in the future, be primarily trained with data generated by artificial neural networks themselves. We study this process for models that belong to exponential families, deriving equations of motions that govern the dynamics of the parameters. We show that maximum likelihood estimation of the parameters endows sufficient statistics with the martingale property and that as a result the process converges to absorbing states that amplify initial biases present in the data. However, we show that this outcome may be prevented if the data contains at least one data point generated from a ground truth model, by relying on maximum a posteriori estimation or by introducing regularisation.

Distances between probability distributions are a key component of many statistical machine learning tasks, from two-sample testing to generative modeling, among others. We introduce a novel distance between measures that compares them through a Schatten norm of their kernel covariance operators. We show that this new distance is an integral probability metric that can be framed between a Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD) and a Wasserstein distance. In particular, we show that it avoids some pitfalls of MMD, by being more discriminative and robust to the choice of hyperparameters. Moreover, it benefits from some compelling properties of kernel methods, that can avoid the curse of dimensionality for their sample complexity. We provide an algorithm to compute the distance in practice by introducing an extension of kernel matrix for difference of distributions that could be of independent interest. Those advantages are illustrated by robust approximate Bayesian computation under contamination as well as particle flow simulations.

Unlike classification, whose goal is to estimate the class of each data point in a dataset, prevalence estimation or quantification is a task that aims to estimate the distribution of classes in a dataset. The two main tasks in prevalence estimation are to adjust for bias, due to the prevalence in the training dataset, and to quantify the uncertainty in the estimate. The standard methods used to quantify uncertainty in prevalence estimates are bootstrapping and Bayesian quantification methods. It is not clear which approach is ideal in terms of precision (i.e. the width of confidence intervals) and coverage (i.e. the confidence intervals being well-calibrated). Here, we propose Precise Quantifier (PQ), a Bayesian quantifier that is more precise than existing quantifiers and with well-calibrated coverage. We discuss the theory behind PQ and present experiments based on simulated and real-world datasets. Through these experiments, we establish the factors which influence quantification precision: the discriminatory power of the underlying classifier; the size of the labeled dataset used to train the quantifier; and the size of the unlabeled dataset for which prevalence is estimated. Our analysis provides deep insights into uncertainty quantification for quantification learning.

In scientific domains -- from biology to the social sciences -- many questions boil down to \textit{What effect will we observe if we intervene on a particular variable?} If the causal relationships (e.g.~a causal graph) are known, it is possible to estimate the intervention distributions. In the absence of this domain knowledge, the causal structure must be discovered from the available observational data. However, observational data are often compatible with multiple causal graphs, making methods that commit to a single structure prone to overconfidence. A principled way to manage this structural uncertainty is via Bayesian inference, which averages over a posterior distribution on possible causal structures and functional mechanisms. Unfortunately, the number of causal structures grows super-exponentially with the number of nodes in the graph, making computations intractable. We propose to circumvent these challenges by using meta-learning to create an end-to-end model: the Model-Averaged Causal Estimation Transformer Neural Process (MACE-TNP). The model is trained to predict the Bayesian model-averaged interventional posterior distribution, and its end-to-end nature bypasses the need for expensive calculations. Empirically, we demonstrate that MACE-TNP outperforms strong Bayesian baselines. Our work establishes meta-learning as a flexible and scalable paradigm for approximating complex Bayesian causal inference, that can be scaled to increasingly challenging settings in the future.

We propose Bayesian Hierarchical Invariant Prediction (BHIP) reframing Invariant Causal Prediction (ICP) through the lens of Hierarchical Bayes. We leverage the hierarchical structure to explicitly test invariance of causal mechanisms under heterogeneous data, resulting in improved computational scalability for a larger number of predictors compared to ICP. Moreover, given its Bayesian nature BHIP enables the use of prior information. In this paper, we test two sparsity inducing priors: horseshoe and spike-and-slab, both of which allow us a more reliable identification of causal features. We test BHIP in synthetic and real-world data showing its potential as an alternative inference method to ICP.

We establish a fundamental connection between optimal structure learning and optimal conditional independence testing by showing that the minimax optimal rate for structure learning problems is determined by the minimax rate for conditional independence testing in these problems. This is accomplished by establishing a general reduction between these two problems in the case of poly-forests, and demonstrated by deriving optimal rates for several examples, including Bernoulli, Gaussian and nonparametric models. Furthermore, we show that the optimal algorithm in these settings is a suitable modification of the PC algorithm. This theoretical finding provides a unified framework for analyzing the statistical complexity of structure learning through the lens of minimax testing.

As estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effect (HTE) is increasingly adopted across a wide range of scientific and industrial applications, the treatment action space can naturally expand, from a binary treatment variable to a structured treatment policy. This policy may include several policy factors such as a continuous treatment intensity variable, or discrete treatment assignments. From first principles, we derive the formulation for incorporating multiple treatment policy variables into the functional forms of individual and average treatment effects. Building on this, we develop a methodology to directly rank subjects using aggregated HTE functions. In particular, we construct a Neural-Augmented Naive Bayes layer within a deep learning framework to incorporate an arbitrary number of factors that satisfies the Naive Bayes assumption. The factored layer is then applied with continuous treatment variables, treatment assignment, and direct ranking of aggregated treatment effect functions. Together, these algorithms build towards a generic framework for deep learning of heterogeneous treatment policies, and we show their power to improve performance with public datasets.

Transfer learning has become an essential paradigm in artificial intelligence, enabling the transfer of knowledge from a source task to improve performance on a target task. This approach, particularly through techniques such as pretraining and fine-tuning, has seen significant success in fields like computer vision and natural language processing. However, despite its widespread use, how to reliably assess the transferability of knowledge remains a challenge. Understanding the theoretical underpinnings of each transferability metric is critical for ensuring the success of transfer learning. In this survey, we provide a unified taxonomy of transferability metrics, categorizing them based on transferable knowledge types and measurement granularity. This work examines the various metrics developed to evaluate the potential of source knowledge for transfer learning and their applicability across different learning paradigms emphasizing the need for careful selection of these metrics. By offering insights into how different metrics work under varying conditions, this survey aims to guide researchers and practitioners in selecting the most appropriate metric for specific applications, contributing to more efficient, reliable, and trustworthy AI systems. Finally, we discuss some open challenges in this field and propose future research directions to further advance the application of transferability metrics in trustworthy transfer learning.