In modern biomedical and econometric studies, longitudinal processes are often characterized by complex time-varying associations and abrupt regime shifts that are shared across correlated outcomes. Standard functional data analysis (FDA) methods, which prioritize smoothness, often fail to capture these dynamic structural features, particularly in high-dimensional settings. This article introduces Adaptive Joint Learning (AJL), a hierarchical regularization framework designed to integrate functional variable selection with structural changepoint detection in multivariate time-varying coefficient models. Unlike standard simultaneous estimation approaches, we propose a theoretically grounded two-stage screening-and-refinement procedure. This framework first synergizes adaptive group-wise penalization with sure screening principles to robustly identify active predictors, followed by a refined fused regularization step that effectively borrows strength across multiple outcomes to detect local regime shifts. We provide a rigorous theoretical analysis of the estimator in the ultra-high-dimensional regime (p >> n). Crucially, we establish the sure screening consistency of the first stage, which serves as the foundation for proving that the refined estimator achieves the oracle property-performing as well as if the true active set and changepoint locations were known a priori. A key theoretical contribution is the explicit handling of approximation bias via undersmoothing conditions to ensure valid asymptotic inference. The proposed method is validated through comprehensive simulations and an application to Sleep-EDF data, revealing novel dynamic patterns in physiological states.

Empirical investigations into unintended model behavior often show that the algorithm is predicting another outcome than what was intended. These exposes highlight the need to identify when algorithms predict unintended quantities - ideally before deploying them into consequential settings. We propose a falsification framework that provides a principled statistical test for discriminant validity: the requirement that an algorithm predict intended outcomes better than impermissible ones. Drawing on falsification practices from causal inference, econometrics, and psychometrics, our framework compares calibrated prediction losses across outcomes to assess whether the algorithm exhibits discriminant validity with respect to a specified impermissible proxy. In settings where the target outcome is difficult to observe, multiple permissible proxy outcomes may be available; our framework accommodates both this setting and the case with a single permissible proxy. Throughout we use nonparametric hypothesis testing methods that make minimal assumptions on the data-generating process. We illustrate the method in an admissions setting, where the framework establishes discriminant validity with respect to gender but fails to establish discriminant validity with respect to race. This demonstrates how falsification can serve as an early validity check, prior to fairness or robustness analyses. We also provide analysis in a criminal justice setting, where we highlight the limitations of our framework and emphasize the need for complementary approaches to assess other aspects of construct validity and external validity.

Boosting has garnered significant interest across both machine learning and statistical communities. Traditional boosting algorithms, designed for fully observed random samples, often struggle with real-world problems, particularly with interval-censored data. This type of data is common in survival analysis and time-to-event studies where exact event times are unobserved but fall within known intervals. Effective handling of such data is crucial in fields like medical research, reliability engineering, and social sciences. In this work, we introduce novel nonparametric boosting methods for regression and classification tasks with interval-censored data. Our approaches leverage censoring unbiased transformations to adjust loss functions and impute transformed responses while maintaining model accuracy. Implemented via functional gradient descent, these methods ensure scalability and adaptability. We rigorously establish their theoretical properties, including optimality and mean squared error trade-offs. Our proposed methods not only offer a robust framework for enhancing predictive accuracy in domains where interval-censored data are common but also complement existing work, expanding the applicability of existing boosting techniques. Empirical studies demonstrate robust performance across various finite-sample scenarios, highlighting the practical utility of our approaches.

Despite their promise, fair machine learning methods often yield Pareto-inefficient models, in which the performance of certain groups can be improved without degrading that of others. This issue arises frequently in traditional in-processing approaches such as fairness-through-regularization. In contrast, existing Pareto-efficient approaches are biased towards a certain perspective on fairness and fail to adapt to the broad range of fairness metrics studied in the literature. In this paper, we present BADR, a simple framework to recover the optimal Pareto-efficient model for any fairness metric. Our framework recovers its models through a Bilevel Adaptive Rescalarisation procedure. The lower level is a weighted empirical risk minimization task where the weights are a convex combination of the groups, while the upper level optimizes the chosen fairness objective. We equip our framework with two novel large-scale, single-loop algorithms, BADR-GD and BADR-SGD, and establish their convergence guarantees. We release badr, an open-source Python toolbox implementing our framework for a variety of learning tasks and fairness metrics. Finally, we conduct extensive numerical experiments demonstrating the advantages of BADR over existing Pareto-efficient approaches to fairness.

Omics data, such as transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, provide critical insights into disease mechanisms and clinical outcomes. However, their high dimensionality, small sample sizes, and intricate biological networks pose major challenges for reliable prediction and meaningful interpretation. Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) offer a promising way to integrate prior knowledge by encoding feature relationships as graphs. Yet, existing methods typically rely solely on either an externally curated feature graph or a data-driven generated one, which limits their ability to capture complementary information. To address this, we propose the external and generated Graph Neural Network (engGNN), a dual-graph framework that jointly leverages both external known biological networks and data-driven generated graphs. Specifically, engGNN constructs a biologically informed undirected feature graph from established network databases and complements it with a directed feature graph derived from tree-ensemble models. This dual-graph design produces more comprehensive embeddings, thereby improving predictive performance and interpretability. Through extensive simulations and real-world applications to gene expression data, engGNN consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines. Beyond classification, engGNN provides interpretable feature importance scores that facilitate biologically meaningful discoveries, such as pathway enrichment analysis. Taken together, these results highlight engGNN as a robust, flexible, and interpretable framework for disease classification and biomarker discovery in high-dimensional omics contexts.

Healthcare sector indices consolidate the economic health of pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and healthcare service firms. The short-term movements in these indices are closely intertwined with capital allocation decisions affecting research and development investment, drug availability, and long-term health outcomes. This research investigates whether historical open-high-low-close (OHLC) index data contain sufficient information for predicting the directional movement of the opening index on the subsequent trading day. The problem is formulated as a supervised classification task involving a one-step-ahead rolling window. A diverse feature set is constructed, comprising original prices, volatility-based technical indicators, and a novel class of nowcasting features derived from mutual OHLC ratios. The framework is evaluated on data from healthcare indices in the U.S. and Indian markets over a five-year period spanning multiple economic phases, including the COVID-19 pandemic. The results demonstrate robust predictive performance, with accuracy exceeding 0.8 and Matthews correlation coefficients above 0.6. Notably, the proposed nowcasting features have emerged as a key determinant of the market movement. We have employed the Shapley-based explainability paradigm to further elucidate the contribution of the features: outcomes reveal the dominant role of the nowcasting features, followed by a more moderate contribution of original prices. This research offers a societal utility: the proposed features and model for short-term forecasting of healthcare indices can reduce information asymmetry and support a more stable and equitable health economy.

Fairness and privacy are two vital pillars of trustworthy machine learning. Despite extensive research on these individual topics, the relationship between fairness and privacy has received significantly less attention. In this paper, we utilize the information-theoretic measure Chernoff Information to highlight the data-dependent nature of the relationship among the triad of fairness, privacy, and accuracy. We first define Noisy Chernoff Difference, a tool that allows us to analyze the relationship among the triad simultaneously. We then show that for synthetic data, this value behaves in 3 distinct ways (depending on the distribution of the data). We highlight the data distributions involved in these cases and explore their fairness and privacy implications. Additionally, we show that Noisy Chernoff Difference acts as a proxy for the steepness of the fairness-accuracy curves. Finally, we propose a method for estimating Chernoff Information on data from unknown distributions and utilize this framework to examine the triad dynamic on real datasets. This work builds towards a unified understanding of the fairness-privacy-accuracy relationship and highlights its data-dependent nature.

Linearly parametrized models are widely used in control and signal processing, with the least-squares (LS) estimate being the archetypical solution. When the input is insufficiently exciting, the LS problem may be unsolvable or numerically unstable. This issue can be resolved through regularization, typically with ridge regression. Although regularized estimators reduce the variance error, it remains important to quantify their estimation uncertainty. A possible approach for linear regression is to construct confidence ellipsoids with the Sign-Perturbed Sums (SPS) ellipsoidal outer approximation (EOA) algorithm. The SPS EOA builds non-asymptotic confidence ellipsoids under the assumption that the noises are independent and symmetric about zero. This paper introduces an extension of the SPS EOA algorithm to ridge regression, and derives probably approximately correct (PAC) upper bounds for the resulting region sizes. Compared with previous analyses, our result explicitly show how the regularization parameter affects the region sizes, and provide tighter bounds under weaker excitation assumptions. Finally, the practical effect of regularization is also demonstrated via simulation experiments.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in economics as predictive tools--both to generate synthetic responses in place of human subjects (Horton, 2023; Anthis et al., 2025), and to forecast economic outcomes directly (Hewitt et al., 2024a; Faria-e Castro and Leibovici, 2024; Chan-Lau et al., 2025). Their appeal in these roles is obvious: A pretrained LLM embeds a vast amount of information and can be deployed at negligible cost, often in settings where collecting new, domain-specific human data would be expensive or infeasible. What remains unclear is how to assess the quality of these predictions. This paper proposes a measure that quantifies the domain-specific value of LLMs in an interpretable unit: the amount of human data they substitute for. Specifically, we ask how much human data would be required for a conventional model trained on that data to match the predictive performance of the pretrained LLM in that domain.

Analysis of learned representations has a blind spot: it focuses on $similarity$, measuring how closely embeddings align with external references, but similarity reveals only what is represented, not whether that structure is robust. We introduce $geometric$ $stability$, a distinct dimension that quantifies how reliably representational geometry holds under perturbation, and present $Shesha$, a framework for measuring it. Across 2,463 configurations in seven domains, we show that stability and similarity are empirically uncorrelated ($ρ\approx 0.01$) and mechanistically distinct: similarity metrics collapse after removing the top principal components, while stability retains sensitivity to fine-grained manifold structure. This distinction yields actionable insights: for safety monitoring, stability acts as a functional geometric canary, detecting structural drift nearly 2$\times$ more sensitively than CKA while filtering out the non-functional noise that triggers false alarms in rigid distance metrics; for controllability, supervised stability predicts linear steerability ($ρ= 0.89$-$0.96$); for model selection, stability dissociates from transferability, revealing a geometric tax that transfer optimization incurs. Beyond machine learning, stability predicts CRISPR perturbation coherence and neural-behavioral coupling. By quantifying $how$ $reliably$ systems maintain structure, geometric stability provides a necessary complement to similarity for auditing representations across biological and computational systems.