Linear Autoencoders (LAEs) have shown strong performance in state-of-the-art recommender systems. However, this success remains largely empirical, with limited theoretical understanding. In this paper, we investigate the generalizability - a theoretical measure of model performance in statistical learning - of multivariate linear regression and LAEs. We first propose a PAC-Bayes bound for multivariate linear regression, extending the earlier bound for single-output linear regression by Shalaeva et al. [45], and establish sufficient conditions for its convergence. We then show that LAEs, when evaluated under a relaxed mean squared error, can be interpreted as constrained multivariate linear regression models on bounded data, to which our bound adapts. Furthermore, we develop theoretical methods to improve the computational efficiency of optimizing the LAE bound, enabling its practical evaluation on large models and real-world datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that our bound is tight and correlates well with practical ranking metrics such as Recall@K and NDCG@K.

The growing prevalence of streaming data and increasing concerns over data privacy pose significant challenges for traditional nonparametric regression methods, which are often ill-suited for real-time, privacy-aware learning. In this paper, we tackle these issues by first proposing a novel one-pass online functional stochastic gradient descent algorithm that leverages the Huber loss (H-FSGD), to improve robustness against outliers and heavy-tailed errors in dynamic environments. To further accommodate privacy constraints, we introduce a locally differentially private extension, Private H-FSGD (PH-FSGD), designed to real-time, privacy-preserving estimation. Theoretically, we conduct a comprehensive non-asymptotic convergence analysis of the proposed estimators, establishing finite-sample guarantees and identifying optimal step size schedules that achieve optimal convergence rates. In particular, we provide practical insights into the impact of key hyperparameters, such as step size and privacy budget, on convergence behavior. Extensive experiments validate our theoretical findings, demonstrating that our methods achieve strong robustness and privacy protection without sacrificing efficiency.

We study the problem of controlling worst-case errors in misspecified linear regression under the random design setting, where the regression function is estimated via (penalized) least-squares. This setting arises naturally in value function approximation for bandit algorithms and reinforcement learning (RL). Our first main contribution is the observation that the amplification of the misspecification error when using least-squares is governed by the Lebesgue constant, a classical quantity from approximation theory that depends on the choice of the feature subspace and the covariate distribution. We also show that this dependence on the misspecification error is tight for least-squares regression: in general, no method minimizing the empirical squared loss, including regularized least-squares, can improve it substantially. We argue this explains the empirical observation that some feature-maps (e.g., those derived from the Fourier bases) "work better in RL" than others (e.g., polynomials): given some covariate distribution, the Lebesgue constant is known to be highly sensitive to choice of the feature-map. As a second contribution, we propose a method that augments the original feature set with auxiliary features designed to reduce the error amplification. We then prove that the method successfully competes with an "oracle" that knows the best way of using the auxiliary features to reduce this amplification. For example, when the domain is a real interval and the features are monomials, our method reduces the amplification factor to O(1)as d, while without our method, least-squares with the monomials (and in fact polynomials) will suffer a worst-case error amplification of order Ω(d). It follows that there are functions and feature maps for which our method is consistent, while least-squares is inconsistent.

Randomized experiments are the preferred approach for evaluating the effects of interventions, but they are costly and often yield estimates with substantial uncertainty. On the other hand, in silico experiments leveraging foundation models offer a cost-effective alternative that can potentially attain higher statistical precision. However, the benefits of in silico experiments come with a significant risk: statistical inferences are not valid if the models fail to accurately predict experimental responses to interventions. In this paper, we propose a novel approach that integrates the predictions from multiple foundation models with experimental data while preserving valid statistical inference. Our estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal, with asymptotic variance no larger than the standard estimator based on experimental data alone. Importantly, these statistical properties hold even when model predictions are arbitrarily biased. Empirical results across several randomized experiments show that our estimator offers substantial precision gains, equivalent to a reduction of up to 20% in the sample size needed to match the same precision as the standard estimator based on experimental data alone.

We analyze task orderings in continual learning for linear regression, assuming joint realizability of training data. We focus on orderings that greedily maximize dissimilarity between consecutive tasks, a concept briefly explored in prior work but still surrounded by open questions. Using tools from the Kaczmarz method literature, we formalize such orderings and develop geometric and algebraic intuitions around them. Empirically, we demonstrate that greedy orderings converge faster than random ones in terms of the average loss across tasks, both for linear regression with random data and for linear probing on CIFAR-100classification tasks. Analytically, in a high-rank regression setting, we prove a loss bound for greedy orderings analogous to that of random ones. However, under general rank, we establish a repetition-dependent separation. Specifically, while prior work showed that for random orderings, with or without replacement, the average loss after k iterations is bounded by O(1/ k)--we prove that single-pass greedy orderings may fail catastrophically, whereas those allowing repetition converge at rate O(1/ 3 k). Overall, we reveal nuances within and between greedy and random orderings.

We consider the parameter estimation problem in logistic regression with Gaussian design: the estimation of a fixed unknown parameter $θ^*\in \mathbb{R}^d$ ($\|θ^*\|_2\ge 1$) from $n$ i.i.d. samples $\{(x_i,y_i)\}_{i=1}^n$, where $x_i\sim N(0,I_d)$ and $y_i|x_i \sim {\rm Bernoulli}(1/(1+\exp(-x_i^\top θ^*)))$. Our main aim is to characterize the finite-sample estimation performance and convergence behavior of gradient descent (GD) on the maximum likelihood objective (i.e., the logistic loss). Under small $O(1)$ stepsize and $0$ initialization, we show that GD linearly converges to a small neighborhood of $θ^*$ achieving an $\ell_2$ error of order $O(\sqrt{\|θ^*\|_2^5d/n})$. This substantially goes beyond existing theoretical results that lack non-asymptotic estimation error rate and exhibit much slower parameter convergence. We also establish a faster local linear convergence to the same statistical error under a large $Θ(\|θ^*\|_2)$ stepsize. The main technical component is to show that the gradient of the logistic loss satisfies a certain approximate invertibility condition (AIC). To that end, we uniformly control the deviation of the gradient from its population counterpart by covering and peeling arguments, and then show that the population GD is a contraction by a delicate analysis based on the eigenvalues of population Hessian matrices. Finally, we build upon the recent work Matsumoto and Mazumdar (2025) and devise a novel efficient estimator that attains a sharper rate in high dimensions. This indicates that the existing non-asymptotic guarantees exhibit sub-optimal dependence on $\|θ^*\|_2$, and that in many regimes $Θ(\sqrt{\|θ^*\|_2d/n})$ is the tight estimation error rate. Numerical examples are provided to corroborate our theoretical results.

Contextual bandit algorithms have transformed modern experimentation by enabling real-time adaptation for personalized treatment. Yet these advantages create challenges for statistical inference due to adaptivity. We study inference with contextual-bandit data without assuming a well-specified outcome model. In this setting, we show a previously overlooked issue: standard algorithms such as LinUCB may fail to stabilize under misspecified working models, leading to non-Gaussian estimator behavior and invalid inference. This issue is practically important, as misspecified working models -- such as approximations of complex dynamical systems -- are often employed by online agents in real-world adaptive experiments to balance reward, computational tractability, and robustness. We develop an inverse-probability-weighted Z-estimation framework for a broad class of marginal moment targets, including projection parameters, structural parameters with noisy contexts, and off-policy values. We identify a stability condition tailored to this framework, scaled inverse-propensity convergence, under which the IPW-Z estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal with a consistent sandwich variance estimator. We further establish sufficient conditions for scaled inverse-propensity convergence for several policy classes, including multi-armed bandit algorithms and smooth contextual allocation policies. Simulations and a HeartSteps V1 real-data-calibrated application show reliable coverage and competitive performance across multiple targets. Overall, our results highlight the importance of stability-aware adaptive design for valid post-experiment inference.

In this paper we prove some concentration inequalities for two types of error probabilities in the Empirical Risk Principle (ERP) in statistical learning, which provide a lower bound and an upper bound for the minimal risk (in terms of the minimal empirical risk) with non-asymptotic high confidence. The usual boundedness condition of the empirical risk function is relaxed to the Gaussian or exponential integrability condition. The confidence of the lower bound of the minimal risk is shown to be independent of the number of training parameters and the dimension of the input vectors, allowing one to detect the deficiency of a learning machine efficiently; and the confidence of the upper bound of the minimal risk is proved to be high provided that the sample size $n$ is much greater than the box dimension of the parameter set $Θ$ in the Orlicz metric $d_{ψ_1}$ associated with the risk functions. Our work is based on Talagrand's concentration inequalities (the sharp versions by Bousquet and Klein-Rio), transport-entropy inequalities and the recent progress in the theory of empirical processes and statistical learning.

How does the training data affect a model's behavior? This is the question we seek to answer with data attribution. The leading practical approaches to data attribution are based on influence functions (IF). IFs utilize a first-order Taylor approximation to efficiently predict the effect of removing a set of samples from the training set without retraining the model, and are used in a wide variety of machine learning applications. However, especially in the high-dimensional regime (# params Ω(# samples)), they are often imprecise and tend to underestimate the effect of sample removals, even for simple models such as logistic regression. We present rescaled influence functions (RIF), a tool for data attribution which can be used as a dropin replacement for influence functions, with little computational overhead but significant improvement in accuracy. We compare IF and RIF on a range of realworld datasets, showing that RIFs offer significantly better predictions in practice, and present a theoretical analysis explaining this improvement. Finally, we present a simple class of data poisoning attacks that would fool IF-based detections but would be detected by RIF.

Variational inference seeks the best approximation of a target distribution within a chosen family, where "best" means minimising Kullback-Leibler divergence. When the approximation family is exponential, the optimal approximation satisfies a fixed-point equation. We introduce LSVI (Least Squares Variational Inference), a gradient-free, Monte Carlo-based scheme for the fixed-point recursion, where each iteration boils down to performing ordinary least squares regression on tempered log-target evaluations under the variational approximation. We show that LSVI is equivalent to biased stochastic natural gradient descent and use this to derive convergence rates with respect to the numbers of samples and iterations. When the approximation family is Gaussian, LSVI involves inverting the Fisher information matrix, whose size grows quadratically with dimension d. We exploit the regression formulation to eliminate the need for this inversion, yielding O(d3) complexity in the full-covariance case and O(d) in the mean-field case. Finally, we numerically demonstrate LSVI's performance on various tasks, including logistic regression, discrete variable selection, and Bayesian synthetic likelihood, showing results competitive with state-of-the-art methods, even when gradients are unavailable.