Online advertising platforms use automated auctions to connect advertisers with potential customers, requiring effective bidding strategies to maximize profits. Accurate ad impact estimation requires considering three key factors: delayed and long-term effects, cumulative ad impacts such as reinforcement or fatigue, and customer heterogeneity. However, these effects are often not jointly addressed in previous studies. To capture these factors, we model ad bidding as a Contextual Markov Decision Process (CMDP) with delayed Poisson rewards. For efficient estimation, we propose a two-stage maximum likelihood estimator combined with data-splitting strategies, ensuring controlled estimation error based on the first-stage estimator's (in)accuracy. Building on this, we design a reinforcement learning algorithm to derive efficient personalized bidding strategies. This approach achieves a near-optimal regret bound of O(dH2 T), where d is the contextual dimension, H is the number of rounds, and T is the number of customers. Our theoretical findings are validated by simulation experiments.

Quantifying differences between probability distributions is fundamental to statistics and machine learning, primarily for comparing statistical uncertainty. In contrast, epistemic uncertainty--due to incomplete knowledge--requires richer representations than those offered by classical probability. Imprecise probability (IP) theory offers such models, capturing ambiguity and partial belief. This has driven growing interest in imprecise probabilistic machine learning (IPML), where inference and decision-making rely on broader uncertainty models--highlighting the need for metrics beyond classical probability. This work introduces the Integral Imprecise Probability Metric (IIPM) framework, a Choquet integral-based generalisation of classical Integral Probability Metrics (IPMs) to the setting of capacities--a broad class of IP models encompassing many existing ones, including lower probabilities, probability intervals, belief functions, and more. Theoretically, we establish conditions under which IIPM serves as a valid metric and metrises a form of weak convergence of capacities. Practically, IIPM not only enables comparison across different IP models but also supports the quantification of epistemic uncertainty (EU) within a single IP model. In particular, by comparing an IP model with its conjugate, IIPM gives rise to a new class of EU measures--Maximum Mean Imprecisions (MMIs)--which satisfy key axiomatic properties proposed in the uncertainty quantification literature. We validate MMI through selective classification experiments, demonstrating strong empirical performance against established EU measures, and outperforming them when classical methods struggle to scale to a large number of classes.

A generalizable reward model is crucial in Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) as it enables correctly evaluating unseen prompt-response pairs. However, existing reward models can lack this ability, as they are typically trained by increasing the reward gap between the chosen and rejected responses, while overlooking the prompts that the responses are conditioned on. Consequently, when the trained reward model is evaluated on prompt-response pairs that lie outside the data distribution, neglecting the effect of prompts may result in poor generalization of the reward model. To address this issue, we decompose the reward value into two independent components: prompt-free reward and prompt-related reward. Prompt-free reward represents the evaluation that is determined only by responses, while the prompt-related reward reflects the reward that derives from both the prompt and the response. We extract these two components from an information-theoretic perspective, which requires no extra models. Subsequently, we propose a new reward learning algorithm by prioritizing data samples based on their prompt-free reward values. Through toy examples, we demonstrate that the extracted prompt-free and prompt-related rewards effectively characterize the two parts of the reward value. Further, standard evaluations show that our method improves both the alignment performance and the generalization capability of the reward model.

Recent advances in reasoning techniques have substantially improved the performance of large language models (LLMs), raising expectations for their ability to provide accurate, truthful, and reliable information. However, emerging evidence suggests that iterative reasoning may foster belief entrenchment, rather than enhancing truth-seeking behavior. In this study, we propose a systematic evaluation framework for belief entrenchment in LLM reasoning by leveraging the Martingale property from Bayesian statistics. This property implies that, under rational belief updating, the expected value of future beliefs should remain equal to the current belief, i.e., belief updates cannot be predicted from solely the current belief. We propose the unsupervised, regression-based Martingale Score to measure violations of this property, signaling a deviation from the Bayesian ability of updating on new evidence. In open-ended problem domains, including event forecasting, value-laden questions, and academic paper review, we found such violations to be widespread across models, reasoning paradigms, problem domains, and system prompts, where the future beliefs are consistently predictable from the model's current belief, a phenomenon which we term belief entrenchment. Through comprehensive experiments, we identify the models (e.g., GPT-4o), reasoning techniques (e.g., chain of thought), and domains (e.g., forecasting) more prone to belief entrenchment. Finally, we validate the Martingale Score by showing that it predicts ground-truth accuracy on problem domains where ground truth labels are available. This indicates that, while designed as an unsupervised metric that operates even in domains without access to ground truth, the Martingale Score is a useful proxy of the truth-seeking ability of the LLM reasoning process.

We introduce DeCaFlow, a deconfounding causal generative model. Training once per dataset using just observational data and the underlying causal graph, DeCaFlow enables accurate causal inference on continuous variables under the presence of hidden confounders. Specifically, we extend previous results on causal estimation under hidden confounding to show that a single instance of DeCaFlow provides correct estimates for all causal queries identifiable with do-calculus, leveraging proxy variables to adjust for the causal effects when do-calculus alone is insufficient. Moreover, we show that counterfactual queries are identifiable as long as their interventional counterparts are identifiable, and thus are also correctly estimated by DeCaFlow. Our empirical results on diverse settings--including the Ecoli70 dataset, with 3 independent hidden confounders, tens of observed variables and hundreds of causal queries--show that DeCaFlow outperforms existing approaches, while demonstrating its out-of-the-box applicability to any given causal graph.

The estimation of average treatment effects (ATEs), defined as the difference in expected outcomes between treatment and control groups, is a central topic in causal inference. This study develops semiparametric efficient estimators for ATE in a setting where only a treatment group and an unlabeled group--consisting of units whose treatment status is unknown--are observed. This scenario constitutes a variant of learning from positive and unlabeled data (PU learning) and can be viewed as a special case of ATE estimation with missing data. For this setting, we derive the semiparametric efficiency bounds, which characterize the lowest achievable asymptotic variance for regular estimators. We then construct semiparametric efficient ATE estimators that attain these bounds. Our results contribute to the literature on causal inference with missing data and weakly supervised learning.

Causal discovery from observational data is a fundamental task in artificial intelligence, with far-reaching implications for decision-making, predictions, and interventions. Despite significant advances, existing methods can be broadly categorized as constraint-based or score-based approaches. Constraint-based methods offer rigorous causal discovery but are often hindered by small sample sizes, while score-based methods provide flexible optimization but typically forgo explicit conditional independence testing. This work explores a third avenue: developing differentiable d-separation scores, obtained through a percolation theory using soft logic. This enables the implementation of a new type of causal discovery method: gradient-based optimization of conditional independence constraints. Empirical evaluations demonstrate the robust performance of our approach in low-sample regimes, surpassing traditional constraint-based and score-based baselines on a real-world dataset.

Quantification learning is the task of predicting the label distribution of a set of instances. We study this problem in the context of graph-structured data, where the instances are vertices. Previously, this problem has only been addressed via node clustering methods. In this paper, we extend the popular Adjusted Classify & Count (ACC) method to graphs. We show that the prior probability shift assumption upon which ACC relies is often not applicable to graph quantification problems. To address this issue, we propose structural importance sampling (SIS), the first graph quantification method that is applicable under (structural) covariate shift. Additionally, we propose Neighborhood-aware ACC, which improves quantification in the presence of non-homophilic edges. We show the effectiveness of our techniques on multiple graph quantification tasks.

Recent advances in Structure-based Drug Design (SBDD) have leveraged generative models for 3D molecular generation, predominantly evaluating model performance by binding affinity to target proteins. However, practical drug discovery necessitates high binding affinity along with synthetic feasibility and selectivity, critical properties that were largely neglected in previous evaluations. To address this gap, we identify fundamental limitations of conventional diffusion-based generative models in effectively guiding molecule generation toward these diverse pharmacological properties. We propose CBYG, a novel framework extending Bayesian Flow Network into a gradient-based conditional generative model that robustly integrates property-specific guidance. Additionally, we introduce a comprehensive evaluation scheme incorporating practical benchmarks for binding affinity, synthetic feasibility, and selectivity, overcoming the limitations of conventional evaluation methods. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our proposed CBYG framework significantly outperforms baseline models across multiple essential evaluation criteria, highlighting its effectiveness and practicality for real-world drug discovery applications.

Causal mediation analysis is crucial for deconstructing complex mechanisms of action. However, in current mediation analysis, complex structures derived from causal discovery lack direct interpretation of mediation pathways, while traditional mediation analysis and effect estimation are limited by the reliance on pre-specified pathways, leading to a disconnection between structure discovery and causal mechanism understanding. Therefore, a unified framework integrating structure discovery, pathway identification, and effect estimation systematically quantifies mediation pathways under structural uncertainty, enabling automated identification and inference of mediation pathways. To this end, we propose Structure-Informed Guided Mediation Analysis (SIGMA), which guides automated mediation pathway identification through probabilistic causal structure discovery and uncertainty quantification, enabling end-to-end propagation of structural uncertainty from structure learning to effect estimation. Specifically, SIGMA employs differentiable Flow-Structural Equation Models to learn structural posteriors, generating diverse Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) to quantify structural uncertainty. Based on these DAGs, we introduce the Path Stability Score to evaluate the marginal probability of pathways, identifying high-confidence mediation paths. For identified mediation pathways, we integrate Efficient Influence Functions with Bayesian model averaging to fuse within-structure estimation uncertainty and between-structure effect variation, propagating uncertainty to the final effect estimates. In synthetic data experiments, SIGMA achieves state-of-the-art performance in pathway identification accuracy and effect quantification precision under structural uncertainty, concurrent multiple pathways, and nonlinear scenarios. In real-world applications using Human Phenotype Project data, SIGMA identifies mediation effects of sleep quality on cardiovascular health through inflammatory and metabolic pathways, uncovering previously unspecified multiple mediation paths.