Recursive decision trees have emerged as a leading methodology for heterogeneous causal treatment effect estimation and inference in experimental and observational settings. These procedures are fitted using the celebrated CART (Classification And Regression Tree) algorithm [Breiman et al., 1984], or custom variants thereof, and hence are believed to be "adaptive" to high-dimensional data, sparsity, or other specific features of the underlying data generating process. Athey and Imbens [2016] proposed several "honest" causal decision tree estimators, which have become the standard in both academia and industry. We study their estimators, and variants thereof, and establish lower bounds on their estimation error. We demonstrate that these popular heterogeneous treatment effect estimators cannot achieve a polynomial-in-$n$ convergence rate under basic conditions, where $n$ denotes the sample size. Contrary to common belief, honesty does not resolve these limitations and at best delivers negligible logarithmic improvements in sample size or dimension. As a result, these commonly used estimators can exhibit poor performance in practice, and even be inconsistent in some settings. Our theoretical insights are empirically validated through simulations.

We demonstrate that learning procedures that rely on aggregated labels, e.g., label information distilled from noisy responses, enjoy robustness properties impossible without data cleaning. This robustness appears in several ways. In the context of risk consistency -- when one takes the standard approach in machine learning of minimizing a surrogate (typically convex) loss in place of a desired task loss (such as the zero-one mis-classification error) -- procedures using label aggregation obtain stronger consistency guarantees than those even possible using raw labels. And while classical statistical scenarios of fitting perfectly-specified models suggest that incorporating all possible information -- modeling uncertainty in labels -- is statistically efficient, consistency fails for ``standard'' approaches as soon as a loss to be minimized is even slightly mis-specified. Yet procedures leveraging aggregated information still converge to optimal classifiers, highlighting how incorporating a fuller view of the data analysis pipeline, from collection to model-fitting to prediction time, can yield a more robust methodology by refining noisy signals.

Network representation learning seeks to embed networks into a low-dimensional space while preserving the structural and semantic properties, thereby facilitating downstream tasks such as classification, trait prediction, edge identification, and community detection. Motivated by challenges in brain connectivity data analysis that is characterized by subject-specific, high-dimensional, and sparse networks that lack node or edge covariates, we propose a novel contrastive learning-based statistical approach for network edge embedding, which we name as Adaptive Contrastive Edge Representation Learning (ACERL). It builds on two key components: contrastive learning of augmented network pairs, and a data-driven adaptive random masking mechanism. We establish the non-asymptotic error bounds, and show that our method achieves the minimax optimal convergence rate for edge representation learning. We further demonstrate the applicability of the learned representation in multiple downstream tasks, including network classification, important edge detection, and community detection, and establish the corresponding theoretical guarantees. We validate our method through both synthetic data and real brain connectivities studies, and show its competitive performance compared to the baseline method of sparse principal components analysis.

Deep neural networks tend to memorize noisy labels, severely degrading their generalization performance. Although Mixup has demonstrated effectiveness in improving generalization and robustness, existing Mixup-based methods typically perform indiscriminate mixing without principled guidance on sample selection and mixing strategy, inadvertently propagating noisy supervision. To overcome these limitations, we propose SelectMix, a confidence-guided mixing framework explicitly tailored for noisy labels. SelectMix first identifies potentially noisy or ambiguous samples through confidence based mismatch analysis using K-fold cross-validation, then selectively blends identified uncertain samples with confidently predicted peers from their potential classes. Furthermore, SelectMix employs soft labels derived from all classes involved in the mixing process, ensuring the labels accurately represent the composition of the mixed samples, thus aligning supervision signals closely with the actual mixed inputs. Through extensive theoretical analysis and empirical evaluations on multiple synthetic (MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100) and real-world benchmark datasets (CIFAR-N, MNIST and Clothing1M), we demonstrate that SelectMix consistently outperforms strong baseline methods, validating its effectiveness and robustness in learning with noisy labels.

We study online Riemannian optimization on Hadamard manifolds under the framework of horospherical convexity (h-convexity). Prior work mostly relies on the geodesic convexity (g-convexity), leading to regret bounds scaling poorly with the manifold curvature. To address this limitation, we analyze Riemannian online gradient descent for h-convex and strongly h-convex functions and establish $O(\sqrt{T})$ and $O(\log(T))$ regret guarantees, respectively. These bounds are curvature-independent and match the results in the Euclidean setting. We validate our approach with experiments on the manifold of symmetric positive definite (SPD) matrices equipped with the affine-invariant metric. In particular, we investigate online Tyler's $M$-estimation and online Fréchet mean computation, showing the application of h-convexity in practice.

Magnitude, obtained as a special case of Euler characteristic of enriched category, represents a sense of the size of metric spaces and is related to classical notions such as cardinality, dimension, and volume. While the studies have explained the meaning of magnitude from various perspectives, continuity also gives a valuable view of magnitude. Based on established results about continuity of magnitude and maximum diversity, this article focuses on continuity of weighting, a distribution whose totality is magnitude, and its variation corresponding to maximum diversity. Meanwhile, recent studies also illuminated the connection between magnitude and data analysis by applying magnitude theory to point clouds representing the data or the set of model parameters. This article will also provide an application for time series analysis by introducing a new kind of invariants of periodic time series, where the invariance follows directly from the continuity results. As a use-case, a simple machine learning experiment is conducted with real-world data, in which the suggested invariants improved the performance.

For premium consumer products, pricing strategy is not about a single number, but about understanding the perceived monetary value of the features that justify a higher cost. This paper proposes a robust methodology to deconstruct a product's price into the tangible value of its constituent parts. We employ Bayesian Hierarchical Conjoint Analysis, a sophisticated statistical technique, to solve this high-stakes business problem using the Apple iPhone as a universally recognizable case study. We first simulate a realistic choice based conjoint survey where consumers choose between different hypothetical iPhone configurations. We then develop a Bayesian Hierarchical Logit Model to infer consumer preferences from this choice data. The core innovation of our model is its ability to directly estimate the Willingness-to-Pay (WTP) in dollars for specific feature upgrades, such as a "Pro" camera system or increased storage. Our results demonstrate that the model successfully recovers the true, underlying feature valuations from noisy data, providing not just a point estimate but a full posterior probability distribution for the dollar value of each feature. This work provides a powerful, practical framework for data-driven product design and pricing strategy, enabling businesses to make more intelligent decisions about which features to build and how to price them.

Although conceptually related, variable selection and relative importance (RI) analysis have been treated quite differently in the literature. While RI is typically used for post-hoc model explanation, this paper explores its potential for variable ranking and filter-based selection before model creation. Specifically, we anticipate strong performance from the RI measures because they incorporate both direct and combined effects of predictors, addressing a key limitation of marginal correlation that ignores dependencies among predictors. We implement and evaluate the RI-based variable selection methods using general dominance (GD), comprehensive relative importance (CRI), and a newly proposed, computationally efficient variant termed CRI.Z. We first demonstrate how the RI measures more accurately rank the variables than the marginal correlation, especially when there are suppressed or weak predictors. We then show that predictive models built on these rankings are highly competitive, often outperforming state-of-the-art methods such as the lasso and relaxed lasso. The proposed RI-based methods are particularly effective in challenging cases involving clusters of highly correlated predictors, a setting known to cause failures in many benchmark methods. Although lasso methods have dominated the recent literature on variable selection, our study reveals that the RI-based method is a powerful and competitive alternative. We believe these underutilized tools deserve greater attention in statistics and machine learning communities. The code is available at: https://github.com/tien-endotchang/RI-variable-selection.

We propose FACTORS, a framework that combines design of experiments with Shapley decomposition to address performance and stability issues that are sensitive to combinations of training factors. Our approach consistently estimates main effects and two-factor interactions, then integrates them into a risk-adjusted objective function that jointly accounts for uncertainty and cost, enabling reliable selection of configurations under a fixed budget. Effect estimation is implemented through two complementary paths: a plug-in path based on conditional means, and a least-squares path that reconstructs Shapley contributions from samples. These paths are designed to work complementarily even when design density and bias levels differ. By incorporating standardization of estimates, bias correction, and uncertainty quantification, our procedure ensures comparability across heterogeneous factor spaces and designs, while a lightweight search routine yields configurations within practical time even for large factor spaces. On the theoretical side, we provide error decompositions, sample complexity analysis, and upper bounds on optimality gaps. On the interpretive side, we summarize main effects and interactions in map form, highlighting adjustment priorities and safe improvement pathways. Across diverse datasets and design conditions, our approach improves rank preservation and optimal configuration identification, reduces decision-making risks, and offers a tuning foundation that delivers interpretable justification alongside stable performance gains even under budget constraints.

Graph machine learning models often achieve similar overall performance yet behave differently at the node level, failing on different subsets of nodes with varying reliability. Standard evaluation metrics such as accuracy obscure these fine grained differences, making it difficult to diagnose when and where models fail. We introduce NodePro, a node profiling framework that enables fine-grained diagnosis of model behavior by assigning interpretable profile scores to individual nodes. These scores combine data-centric signals, such as feature dissimilarity, label uncertainty, and structural ambiguity, with model-centric measures of prediction confidence and consistency during training. By aligning model behavior with these profiles, NodePro reveals systematic differences between models, even when aggregate metrics are indistinguishable. We show that node profiles generalize to unseen nodes, supporting prediction reliability without ground-truth labels. Finally, we demonstrate the utility of NodePro in identifying semantically inconsistent or corrupted nodes in a structured knowledge graph, illustrating its effectiveness in real-world settings.