Selective classification enhances the reliability of predictive models by allowing them to abstain from making uncertain predictions. In this work, we revisit the design of optimal selection functions through the lens of the Neyman--Pearson lemma, a classical result in statistics that characterizes the optimal rejection rule as a likelihood ratio test. We show that this perspective not only unifies the behavior of several post-hoc selection baselines, but also motivates new approaches to selective classification which we propose here. A central focus of our work is the setting of covariate shift, where the input distribution at test time differs from that at training. This realistic and challenging scenario remains relatively underexplored in the context of selective classification. We evaluate our proposed methods across a range of vision and language tasks, including both supervised learning and vision-language models. Our experiments demonstrate that our Neyman--Pearson-informed methods consistently outperform existing baselines, indicating that likelihood ratio-based selection offers a robust mechanism for improving selective classification under covariate shifts. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/clear-nus/sc-likelihood-ratios.

This work aims to demystify the out-of-distribution (OOD) capabilities of in-context learning (ICL) by studying linear regression tasks parameterized with low-rank covariance matrices. With such a parameterization, we can model distribution shifts as a varying angle between the subspace of the training and testing covariance matrices. We prove that a single-layer linear attention model incurs a test risk with a non-negligible dependence on the angle, illustrating that ICL is not robust to such distribution shifts. However, using this framework, we also prove an interesting property of ICL: when trained on task vectors drawn from a union of low-dimensional subspaces, ICL can generalize to any subspace within their span, given sufficiently long prompt lengths. This suggests that the OOD generalization ability of Transformers may actually stem from the new task lying within the span of those encountered during training. We empirically show that our results also hold for models such as GPT-2, and conclude with (i) experiments on how our observations extend to nonlinear function classes and (ii) results on how LoRA has the ability to capture distribution shifts.

Graph signals are widely used to describe vertex attributes or features in graph-structured data, with applications spanning the internet, social media, transportation, sensor networks, and biomedicine. Graph signal processing (GSP) has emerged to facilitate the analysis, processing, and sampling of such signals. While kernel methods have been extensively studied for estimating graph signals from samples provided on a subset of vertices, their application to complex-valued graph signals remains largely unexplored. This paper introduces a novel framework for reconstructing graph signals using kernel methods on complex manifolds. By embedding graph vertices into a higher-dimensional complex ambient space that approximates a lower-dimensional manifold, the framework extends the reproducing kernel Hilbert space to complex manifolds. It leverages Hermitian metrics and geometric measures to characterize kernels and graph signals. Additionally, several traditional kernels and graph topology-driven kernels are proposed for reconstructing complex graph signals. Finally, experimental results on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of this framework in accurately reconstructing complex graph signals, outperforming conventional kernel-based approaches. This work lays a foundational basis for integrating complex geometry and kernel methods in GSP.

In statistical learning, models are classified as regular or singular depending on whether the mapping from parameters to probability distributions is injective. Most models with hierarchical structures or latent variables are singular, for which conventional criteria such as the Akaike Information Criterion and the Bayesian Information Criterion are inapplicable due to the breakdown of normal approximations for the likelihood and posterior. To address this, the Widely Applicable Information Criterion (WAIC) and the Widely Applicable Bayesian Information Criterion (WBIC) have been proposed. Since WAIC and WBIC are computed using posterior distributions at different temperature settings, separate posterior sampling is generally required. In this paper, we theoretically derive an asymptotic equation that links WAIC and WBIC, despite their dependence on different posteriors. This equation yields an asymptotically unbiased expression of WAIC in terms of the posterior distribution used for WBIC. The result clarifies the structural relationship between these criteria within the framework of singular learning theory, and deepens understanding of their asymptotic behavior. This theoretical contribution provides a foundation for future developments in the computational efficiency of model selection in singular models.

We revisit the classical problem of Bayesian ensembles and address the challenge of learning optimal combinations of Bayesian models in an online, continual learning setting. To this end, we reinterpret existing approaches such as Bayesian model averaging (BMA) and Bayesian stacking through a novel empirical Bayes lens, shedding new light on the limitations and pathologies of BMA. Further motivated by insights from online optimization, we propose Online Bayesian Stacking (OBS), a method that optimizes the log-score over predictive distributions to adaptively combine Bayesian models. A key contribution of our work is establishing a novel connection between OBS and portfolio selection, bridging Bayesian ensemble learning with a rich, well-studied theoretical framework that offers efficient algorithms and extensive regret analysis. We further clarify the relationship between OBS and online BMA, showing that they optimize related but distinct cost functions. Through theoretical analysis and empirical evaluation, we identify scenarios where OBS outperforms online BMA and provide principled guidance on when practitioners should prefer one approach over the other.

The empirical emergence of neural collapse -- a surprising symmetry in the feature representations of the training data in the penultimate layer of deep neural networks -- has spurred a line of theoretical research aimed at its understanding. However, existing work focuses on data-agnostic models or, when data structure is taken into account, it remains limited to multi-layer perceptrons. Our paper fills both these gaps by analyzing modern architectures in a data-aware regime: we prove that global optima of deep regularized transformers and residual networks (ResNets) with LayerNorm trained with cross entropy or mean squared error loss are approximately collapsed, and the approximation gets tighter as the depth grows. More generally, we formally reduce any end-to-end large-depth ResNet or transformer training into an equivalent unconstrained features model, thus justifying its wide use in the literature even beyond data-agnostic settings. Our theoretical results are supported by experiments on computer vision and language datasets showing that, as the depth grows, neural collapse indeed becomes more prominent.

Causal inference determines cause-and-effect relationships between variables and has broad applications across disciplines. Traditional time-series methods often reveal causal links only in a time-averaged sense, while ensemble-based information transfer approaches detect the time evolution of short-term causal relationships but are typically limited to low-dimensional systems. In this paper, a new causal inference framework, called assimilative causal inference (ACI), is developed. Fundamentally different from the state-of-the-art methods, ACI uses a dynamical system and a single realization of a subset of the state variables to identify instantaneous causal relationships and the dynamic evolution of the associated causal influence range (CIR). Instead of quantifying how causes influence effects as done traditionally, ACI solves an inverse problem via Bayesian data assimilation, thus tracing causes backward from observed effects with an implicit Bayesian hypothesis. Causality is determined by assessing whether incorporating the information of the effect variables reduces the uncertainty in recovering the potential cause variables. ACI has several desirable features. First, it captures the dynamic interplay of variables, where their roles as causes and effects can shift repeatedly over time. Second, a mathematically justified objective criterion determines the CIR without empirical thresholds. Third, ACI is scalable to high-dimensional problems by leveraging computationally efficient Bayesian data assimilation techniques. Finally, ACI applies to short time series and incomplete datasets. Notably, ACI does not require observations of candidate causes, which is a key advantage since potential drivers are often unknown or unmeasured. The effectiveness of ACI is demonstrated by complex dynamical systems showcasing intermittency and extreme events.

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is a standard approach to adapting large language models (LLMs) to new domains. In this work, we improve the statistical efficiency of SFT by selecting an informative subset of training examples. Specifically, for a fixed budget of training examples, which determines the computational cost of fine-tuning, we determine the most informative ones. The key idea in our method is to select examples that maximize information gain, measured by the Hessian of the log-likelihood of the LLM. We approximate it efficiently by linearizing the LLM at the last layer using multinomial logistic regression models. Our approach is computationally efficient, analyzable, and performs well empirically. We demonstrate this on several problems, and back our claims with both quantitative results and an LLM evaluation.

We present new fast-rate generalization bounds for multi-task and meta-learning in the unbalanced setting, i.e. when the tasks have training sets of different sizes, as is typically the case in real-world scenarios. Previously, only standard-rate bounds were known for this situation, while fast-rate bounds were limited to the setting where all training sets are of equal size. Our new bounds are numerically computable as well as interpretable, and we demonstrate their flexibility in handling a number of cases where they give stronger guarantees than previous bounds. Besides the bounds themselves, we also make conceptual contributions: we demonstrate that the unbalanced multi-task setting has different statistical properties than the balanced situation, specifically that proofs from the balanced situation do not carry over to the unbalanced setting. Additionally, we shed light on the fact that the unbalanced situation allows two meaningful definitions of multi-task risk, depending on whether if all tasks should be considered equally important or if sample-rich tasks should receive more weight than sample-poor ones.

As machine learning systems are increasingly used in high-stakes domains, there is a growing emphasis placed on making them interpretable to improve trust in these systems. In response, a range of interpretable machine learning (IML) methods have been developed to generate human-understandable insights into otherwise black box models. With these methods, a fundamental question arises: Are these interpretations reliable? Unlike with prediction accuracy or other evaluation metrics for supervised models, the proximity to the true interpretation is difficult to define. Instead, we ask a closely related question that we argue is a prerequisite for reliability: Are these interpretations stable? We define stability as findings that are consistent or reliable under small random perturbations to the data or algorithms. In this study, we conduct the first systematic, large-scale empirical stability study on popular machine learning global interpretations for both supervised and unsupervised tasks on tabular data. Our findings reveal that popular interpretation methods are frequently unstable, notably less stable than the predictions themselves, and that there is no association between the accuracy of machine learning predictions and the stability of their associated interpretations. Moreover, we show that no single method consistently provides the most stable interpretations across a range of benchmark datasets. Overall, these results suggest that interpretability alone does not warrant trust, and underscores the need for rigorous evaluation of interpretation stability in future work. To support these principles, we have developed and released an open source IML dashboard and Python package to enable researchers to assess the stability and reliability of their own data-driven interpretations and discoveries.