Goto

Collaborating Authors

 Performance Analysis


Unveiling the Non-Monotonic Effect of Privacy on Generalization under Byzantine Robustness

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Recent work has established a fundamental trilemma between Byzantine robustness, local differential privacy (LDP), and optimization error in distributed learning. We show that this trilemma does not universally extend to generalization error, but instead depends critically on the privacy regime. Specifically, in the high-noise regime (strong privacy), we prove that increasing privacy reduces the generalization error, i.e., there is no tension between robustness and privacy. In the low-noise regime (weaker privacy), however, the tension between robustness and privacy reappears and increasing privacy indeed degrades generalization. Our theory explains this surprising non-monotonic behavior of the generalization error via matching lower and upper bounds on the algorithmic stability of Byzantine-robust distributed learning under LDP constraints. We corroborate and further analyze these theoretical findings with empirical evaluations.


A Mathematical Optimization Approach for Expert-Informed Bayesian Best Subset Selection

arXiv.org Machine Learning

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.


I-BBS: Coordinate-Free Inference of Latent Sub-Manifolds Using Random Distance Matrix Theory

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Bogomolny, Bohigas and Schmit (BBS) found that the spectrum of the pairwise distance matrix on N points sampled from a smooth d-dimensional manifold encodes a signature of the underlying geometry. We develop I-BBS (Inference-BBS), a coordinate-free method that identifies a low-dimensional latent sub-manifold embedded in a high-dimensional ambient distance matrix alone, without accessing an ambient high-dimensional vector space. It therefore applies even when that space is only partly observable or undefined. We model the ambient embedding by two classes of generative noise, model-based and model-free. The noise mixes the latent signal with off-manifold components, so the eigenvalues reorganise collectively and the latent geometry cannot be read off eigenvalue by eigenvalue. We recover it instead from two integer-stable signatures that survive the noise: the multiplicity of the top non-Perron multiplet, which fixes $d$, and a parameter-free law for how the multiplet positions shrink as the noise grows. On synthetic spheres $S^1$, $S^2$ and $S^3$ these integer signatures are far more stable under noise than the continuous spectral slope, and a blind test recovers both the manifold and the noise model from a single distance matrix. Applications to neural-network representations and to the dynamic training regime are developed in two companion papers.


What LLMs explain is not what they believe: Evaluating explanation sufficiency under models' own input beliefs

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains, where free-text explanations such as chain-of-thought and post-hoc rationales are used to justify model outputs. Yet it remains unclear whether these explanations are sufficient, i.e., if they contain enough information to explain the model's output-generating process. We generalize classical sufficiency from feature attributions to arbitrary explanations and prove that explanation sufficiency can change depending on the input distribution, which must be explicitly defined for LLM explanations. We propose using the LLM itself to generate alternative inputs conditioned on an explanation, capturing its beliefs about possible inputs. We formalize self-consistent sufficiency as a goal for free-text explanations and introduce an information-theoretic metric, SCSuff, that enables evaluation of free-text explanations without relying on predefined biases or shortcuts. Our experiments show that SCSuff agrees with targeted perturbation tests where applicable and demonstrate that explanation sufficiency can vary with the input distribution. We find LLM explanations are generally insufficient and weakly correlated with model size, accuracy, or output entropy. Analysis of final-token hidden states shows that top and bottom SCSuff scores can be predicted from internal representations, suggesting that SCSuff can guide detection and improvement of sufficient LLM explanations. The code for this paper is available at https://github.com/rajesh-lab/self-consistent-sufficiency .


The Decision Geometry of Covariance Estimation for the Global Minimum-Variance Portfolio under Heavy Tails

arXiv.org Machine Learning

The global minimum-variance portfolio (GMVP) is the canonical decision built from an estimated covariance matrix, yet covariance estimators are universally evaluated by matrix-norm loss, which is not the object the decision depends on. We characterise exactly how covariance-estimation error maps into GMVP suboptimality. We prove an exact regret identity and a non-asymptotic bound showing decision regret depends on the estimation error only through its action on the portfolio weights, scaled by portfolio concentration and the conditioning of the true covariance. From this we derive the decision geometry: GMVP regret is invariant to a (p-1)-dimensional projection of the p^2-dimensional error matrix, with invariance to the covariance-scale direction as an exact special case. We then apply the framework to heavy-tailed returns (tail index kappa in (2,4)), establishing the regret convergence rate implied by the centred operator-norm rate, and confirm the theory on a skew-t/t-copula simulation design with pre-registered analysis. The decision-focused advantage is a sharper constant and a concentration discount rather than a faster rate; we report an honest high-conditioning boundary of the rate prediction. The results complement recent decision-focused learning approaches by supplying the exact estimation geometry and consistency theory they lack.


Surprises in Proper Positive-Only Learning

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Binary classification from positive-only samples is a variant of PAC learning in which the learner receives i.i.d. samples from the positive region of an unknown target concept, but is evaluated under the original distribution (which places mass on both positive and negative regions). This model dates back to Natarajan [1987, STOC], and the characterization of improper learning is well-known -- it even appears in textbooks. The characterization of proper positive-only learning, however, has long remained open. In this work, we revisit and settle this question: a concept class is properly learnable from positive-only samples if and only if it has finite VC dimension and satisfies a new combinatorial condition, which we call uniform exterior separability. Together with several separation results, this characterization reveals a surprisingly rich landscape that differs sharply from standard PAC learning: proper and improper learning are separated, randomized and deterministic proper learning are separated, there are classes for which no ERM is a learner, and finite VC dimension does not suffice even for non-uniform learning. Along the way, we introduce new combinatorial dimensions that we believe can be of broader interest in learning theory.


Statistical and Structural Approaches to Algorithmic Fairness

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Modern machine learning systems have outgrown their origins as isolated predictive constructs, evolving into complex socio-technical architectures that actively mediate human opportunity. As algorithms increasingly determine access to economic and social opportunities, it has become widely recognized that these systems are deeply embedded with the structural inequalities and prejudices of their environments. The field of algorithmic fairness emerged in response to the growing recognition that models optimized for predictive accuracy can systematically disadvantage marginalized groups. Early mitigation strategies, however, rested on fragile simplifications that limited their effectiveness in complex sociotechnical environments. This thesis identifies and addresses two fundamental limitations of contemporary fairness paradigms: the reliance on deterministic point estimates for auditing and the treatment of individuals as isolated entities devoid of structural context. First, the diagnosis of algorithmic unfairness has traditionally depended on scalar metrics that fail to capture the nuances of real-world deployment. This deterministic approach ignores the high statistical variance inherent in small, intersectional groups, often leading to false alarms or missed detections of bias. Furthermore, standard auditing struggles with the opacity of black-box models, frequently conflating unjustifiable bias with the influence of legitimate features.


Decision-Aligned Evaluation of Uncertainty Quantification

arXiv.org Machine Learning

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.


When Does Synthetic Data Augmentation Improve Score-Based Imbalanced Classification?

arXiv.org Machine Learning

Synthetic data augmentation is widely used to mitigate class imbalance, but its theoretical effects on score-based classification remain poorly understood. This paper develops a framework for characterizing when synthetic minority augmentation can improve threshold-integrated and threshold-optimized metrics, including AUROC, AUPRC, best-threshold balanced accuracy, and best-threshold \(\F_1\) score. We separate the effect of augmentation into two components: a change in effective class weighting and a discrepancy between the synthetic and true minority distributions. Under well-specified score models, the raw estimator already targets the likelihood-ratio ordering, which is population-optimal for the metrics considered. Consequently, augmentation cannot provide a fundamental population-level improvement beyond possible finite-sample variance reduction, and may introduce additional bias through synthetic distributional error. We further establish minimax lower bounds showing that the raw estimator already achieves the optimal metric-regret rate in the well-specified regime. Under misspecification, however, augmentation can play a qualitatively different role: by changing the effective class balance, it can alter the restricted-class projection and correct ranking errors induced by the raw imbalanced objective. We provide explicit improvement bounds quantifying the roles of approximation error, finite-sample estimation error, and synthetic distributional error. Simulation studies corroborate the theory, demonstrating limited gains under well-specification and nontrivial but nonmonotone improvements under misspecification.