EVEN supervised learning is subject to the famous NoFree Lunch Theorems [1]-[3], which say that, in combinatorial optimization, there is no universal algorithm that works better than its competitors for every objective function [4]-[6]. Indeed, David Wolpert has recently proven that, on average, cross-validation performs as well as anti-crossvalidation (choosing among a set of candidate algorithms based on which has the worst out-of-sample behavior) for supervised learning. Still, he acknowledges that "it is hard to imagine any scientist who would not prefer to use [crossvalidation] to using anti-cross-validation" [7]. On the other hand, unsupervised learning has seldom been studied from the perspective of the NFLTs. This may be because the adjective "unsupervised" suggests that no human input is needed, which is misleading as many unsupervised tasks are combinatorial optimization problems that depend on the choice of the objective function. For instance, it is well known that, among the eigenvectors of the covariance matrix, Principal Components Analysis selects those with the largest variances [8]. However, mode-hunting techniques that rely on spectral manipulation aim at the opposite objective: selecting the eigenvectors of the covariance matrix with the smallest variances [9], [10]. Therefore, unlike in supervised learning, where it is difficult to identify reasons to optimize with respect to anti-cross-validation, in unsupervised learning there are strong reasons to reduce dimensionality for variance minimization. D. A. D ıaz-Pach on and T. Liu are with the Division of Biostatistics, University of Miami, Miami, FL, 33136 USA (e-mail: ddiaz3@miami.edu,

Adaptive specification search generates statistically significant backtests even under martingale-difference nulls. We introduce a falsification audit testing complete predictive workflows against synthetic reference classes, including zero-predictability environments and microstructure placebos. Workflows generating significant walk-forward evidence in these environments are falsified. For passing workflows, we quantify selection-induced performance inflation using an absolute magnitude gap linking optimized in-sample evidence to disjoint walk-forward realizations, adjusted for effective multiplicity. Simulations validate extreme-value scaling under correlated searches and demonstrate detection power under genuine structure. Empirical case studies confirm that many apparent findings represent methodological artifacts rather than genuine predictability.

Existing multi-expert learning-to-defer surrogates are statistically consistent, yet they can underfit, suppress useful experts, or degrade as the expert pool grows. We trace these failures to a shared architectural choice: casting classes and experts as actions inside one augmented prediction geometry. Consistency governs the population target; it says nothing about how the surrogate distributes gradient mass during training. We analyze five surrogates along both axes and show that each trades a fix on one for a failure on the other. We then introduce a decoupled surrogate that estimates the class posterior with a softmax and each expert utility with an independent sigmoid. It admits an $\mathcal{H}$-consistency bound whose constant is $J$-independent for fixed per-expert weight $β{=}λ/J$, and its gradients are free of the amplification, starvation, and coupling pathologies of the augmented family. Experiments on synthetic benchmarks, CIFAR-10, CIFAR-10H, and Covertype confirm that the decoupled surrogate is the only method that avoids amplification under redundancy, preserves rare specialists, and consistently improves over a standalone classifier across all settings.

Conformal selection (CS) uses calibration data to identify test inputs whose unobserved outcomes are likely to satisfy a pre-specified minimal quality requirement, while controlling the false discovery rate (FDR). Existing methods fix the target FDR level before observing data, which prevents the user from adapting the balance between number of selected test inputs and FDR to downstream needs and constraints based on the available data. For example, in genomics or neuroimaging, researchers often inspect the distribution of test statistics, and decide how aggressively to pursue candidates based on observed evidence strength and available follow-up resources. To address this limitation, we introduce {post-hoc CS} (PH-CS), which generates a path of candidate selection sets, each paired with a data-driven false discovery proportion (FDP) estimate. PH-CS lets the user select any operating point on this path by maximizing a user-specified utility, arbitrarily balancing selection size and FDR. Building on conformal e-variables and the e-Benjamini-Hochberg (e-BH) procedure, PH-CS is proved to provide a finite-sample post-hoc reliability guarantee whereby the ratio between estimated FDP level and true FDP is, on average, upper bounded by $1$, so that the average estimated FDP is, to first order, a valid upper bound on the true FDR. PH-CS is extended to control quality defined in terms of a general risk. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that, unlike CS, PH-CS can consistently satisfy user-imposed utility constraints while producing reliable FDP estimates and maintaining competitive FDR control.

In online clustering problems, there is often a large amount of uncertainty over possible cluster assignments that cannot be resolved until more data are observed. This difficulty is compounded when clusters follow complex distributions, as is the case with text data. Sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) methods give a natural way of representing and updating this uncertainty over time, but have prohibitive memory requirements for large-scale problems. We propose a novel SMC algorithm that decomposes clustering problems into approximately independent subproblems, allowing a more compact representation of the algorithm state. Our approach is motivated by the knowledge base construction problem, and we show that our method is able to accurately and efficiently solve clustering problems in this setting and others where traditional SMC struggles.

Synthetic augmentation is increasingly used to mitigate data scarcity in financial machine learning, yet its statistical role remains poorly understood. We formalize synthetic augmentation as a modification of the effective training distribution and show that it induces a structural bias--variance trade-off: while additional samples may reduce estimation error, they may also shift the population objective whenever the synthetic distribution deviates from regions relevant under evaluation. To isolate informational gains from mechanical sample-size effects, we introduce a size-matched null augmentation and a finite-sample, non-parametric block permutation test that remains valid under weak temporal dependence. We evaluate this framework in both controlled Markov-switching environments and real financial datasets, including high-frequency option trade data and a daily equity panel. Across generators spanning bootstrap, copula-based models, variational autoencoders, diffusion models, and TimeGAN, we vary augmentation ratio, model capacity, task type, regime rarity, and signal-to-noise. We show that synthetic augmentation is beneficial only in variance-dominant regimes, such as persistent volatility forecasting-while it deteriorates performance in bias-dominant settings, including near-efficient directional prediction. Rare-regime targeting can improve domain-specific metrics but may conflict with unconditional permutation inference. Our results provide a structural perspective on when synthetic data improves financial learning performance and when it induces persistent distributional distortion.

Data-driven operations management often relies on parameters estimated from costly human-generated labels. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) and other AI systems offer inexpensive auxiliary data, but introduce a new challenge: AI outputs are not direct observations of the target outcomes, but could involve high-dimensional representations with complex and unknown relationships to human labels. Conventional methods leverage AI predictions as direct proxies for true labels, which can be inefficient or unreliable when this relationship is weak or misspecified. We propose Generative Augmented Inference (GAI), a general framework that incorporates AI-generated outputs as informative features for estimating models of human-labeled outcomes. GAI uses an orthogonal moment construction that enables consistent estimation and valid inference with flexible, nonparametric relationship between LLM-generated outputs and human labels. We establish asymptotic normality and show a "safe default" property: relative to human-data-only estimators, GAI weakly improves estimation efficiency under arbitrary auxiliary signals and yields strict gains whenever the auxiliary information is predictive. Empirically, GAI outperforms benchmarks across diverse settings. In conjoint analysis with weak auxiliary signals, GAI reduces estimation error by about 50% and lowers human labeling requirements by over 75%. In retail pricing, where all methods access the same auxiliary inputs, GAI consistently outperforms alternative estimators, highlighting the value of its construction rather than differences in information. In health insurance choice, it cuts labeling requirements by over 90% while maintaining decision accuracy. Across applications, GAI improves confidence interval coverage without inflating width. Overall, GAI provides a principled and scalable approach to integrating AI-generated information.

When considering a model selection or, more generally, an aggregation approach for adaptive statistical inference, it is often necessary to compute estimators over a wide range of model complexities including unnecessarily large models even when the true data-generating process is relatively simple, due to the lack of prior knowledge. This requirement can lead to substantial computational inefficiency. In this work, we propose a novel framework for efficient model aggregation called the early-stopped aggregation (ESA): instead of computing and aggregating estimators for all candidate models, we compute only a small number of simpler ones using an early-stopping criterion and aggregate only these for final inference. Our framework is versatile and applies to both Bayesian model selection, in particular, within the variational Bayes framework, and frequentist estimation, including a general penalized estimation setting. We investigate adaptive optimal property of the ESA approach across three learning paradigms. We first show that ESA achieves optimal adaptive contraction rates in the variational Bayes setting under mild conditions. We extend this result to variational empirical Bayes, where prior hyperparameters are chosen in a data-dependent manner. In addition, we apply the ESA approach to frequentist aggregation including both penalization-based and sample-splitting implementations, and establish corresponding theory. As we demonstrate, there is a clear unification between early-stopped Bayes and frequentist penalized aggregation, with a common "energy" functional comprising a data-fitting term and a complexity-control term that drives both procedures. We further present several applications and numerical studies that highlight the efficiency and strong performance of the proposed approach.

We study post-training interpretability for Support Vector Machines (SVMs) built from truncated orthogonal polynomial kernels. Since the associated reproducing kernel Hilbert space is finite-dimensional and admits an explicit tensor-product orthonormal basis, the fitted decision function can be expanded exactly in intrinsic RKHS coordinates. This leads to Orthogonal Representation Contribution Analysis (ORCA), a diagnostic framework based on normalized Orthogonal Kernel Contribution (OKC) indices. These indices quantify how the squared RKHS norm of the classifier is distributed across interaction orders, total polynomial degrees, marginal coordinate effects, and pairwise contributions. The methodology is fully post-training and requires neither surrogate models nor retraining. We illustrate its diagnostic value on a synthetic double-spiral problem and on a real five-dimensional echocardiogram dataset. The results show that the proposed indices reveal structural aspects of model complexity that are not captured by predictive accuracy alone.

To obtain more accurate model parameters and improve prediction accuracy, we proposed a regularized Kriging model that penalizes the hyperparameter theta in the Gaussian stochastic process, termed the Theta-regularized Kriging. We derived the optimization problem for this model from a maximum likelihood perspective. Additionally, we presented specific implementation details for the iterative process, including the regularized optimization algorithm and the geometric search cross-validation tuning algorithm. Three distinct penalty methods, Lasso, Ridge, and Elastic-net regularization, were meticulously considered. Meanwhile, the proposed Theta-regularized Kriging models were tested on nine common numerical functions and two practical engineering examples. The results demonstrate that, compared with other penalized Kriging models, the proposed model performs better in terms of accuracy and stability.