Deterministic game-solving algorithms are conventionally analyzed in the light of their average-case complexity against a distribution of random game-trees, where leaf values are independently sampled from a fixed distribution. This simplified model enables uncluttered mathematical analysis, revealing two key properties: root value distributions asymptotically collapse to a single fixed value for finite-valued trees, and all reasonable algorithms achieve global optimality. However, these findings are artifacts of the model's design: its long criticized independence assumption strips games of structural complexity, producing trivial instances where no algorithm faces meaningful challenges. To address this limitation, we introduce a simple probabilistic model that incrementally constructs game-trees using a fixed level-wise conditional distribution. By enforcing ancestor dependencies, a critical structural feature of real-world games, our framework generates problems with adjustable difficulty while retaining some form of analytical tractability. For several algorithms, including AlphaBeta and Scout, we derive recursive formulas characterizing their average-case complexities under this model. These allow us to rigorously compare algorithms on deep game-trees, where Monte-Carlo simulations are no longer feasible. While asymptotically, all algorithms seem to converge to identical branching factor (a result analogous to that of independence-based models), deep finite trees reveal stark differences: AlphaBeta incurs a significantly larger constant multiplicative factor compared to algorithms like Scout, leading to a substantial practical slowdown. Our framework sheds new light on classical game-solving algorithms, offering rigorous evidence and analytical tools to advance the understanding of these methods under a richer, more challenging, and yet tractable model.

We design an efficient algorithm that outputs tests for identifying predominantly homogeneous subcohorts of patients from large in-homogeneous datasets. Our theoretical contribution is a rounding technique, similar to that of Goemans and Wiliamson (1995), that approximates the optimal solution within a factor of $0.82$. As an application, we use our algorithm to trade-off sensitivity for specificity to systematically identify clinically interesting homogeneous subcohorts of patients in the RNA microarray dataset for breast cancer from Curtis et al. (2012). One such clinically interesting subcohort suggests a link between LXR over-expression and BRCA2 and MSH6 methylation levels for patients in that subcohort.

Recent impressive results from large reasoning models have been interpreted as a triumph of Chain of Thought (CoT), especially of training on CoTs sampled from base LLMs to help find new reasoning patterns. While these traces certainly seem to help model performance, it is not clear how they actually influence it, with some works ascribing semantics to the traces and others cautioning against relying on them as transparent and faithful proxies of the model's internal computational process. To systematically investigate the role of end-user semantics of derivational traces, we set up a controlled study where we train transformer models from scratch on formally verifiable reasoning traces and the solutions they lead to. We notice that, despite significant gains over the solution-only baseline, models trained on entirely correct traces can still produce invalid reasoning traces even when arriving at correct solutions. More interestingly, our experiments also show that models trained on corrupted traces, whose intermediate reasoning steps bear no relation to the problem they accompany, perform similarly to those trained on correct ones, and even generalize better on out-of-distribution tasks. We also study the effect of GRPO-based RL post-training on trace validity, noting that while solution accuracy increase, this is not accompanied by any improvements in trace validity. Finally, we examine whether reasoning-trace length reflects inference-time scaling and find that trace length is largely agnostic to the underlying computational complexity of the problem being solved. These results challenge the assumption that intermediate tokens or ``Chains of Thought'' reflect or induce predictable reasoning behaviors and caution against anthropomorphizing such outputs or over-interpreting them (despite their mostly seemingly forms) as evidence of human-like or algorithmic behaviors in language models.

In this work, we consider the problem of planning for temporal logic tasks in large robot environments. When full task compliance is unattainable, we aim to achieve the best possible task satisfaction by integrating user preferences for relaxation into the planning process. Utilizing the automata-based representations for temporal logic goals and user preferences, we propose an A*-based planning framework. This approach effectively tackles large-scale problems while generating near-optimal high-level trajectories. To facilitate this, we propose a simple, efficient heuristic that allows for planning over large robot environments in a fraction of time and search memory as compared to uninformed search algorithms. We present extensive case studies to demonstrate the scalability, runtime analysis as well as empirical bounds on the suboptimality of the proposed heuristic.

Neural Combinatorial Optimization (NCO) has emerged as a promising learning-based paradigm for addressing Vehicle Routing Problems (VRPs) by minimizing the need for extensive manual engineering. While existing NCO methods, trained on small-scale instances (e.g., 100 nodes), have demonstrated considerable success on problems of similar scale, their performance significantly degrades when applied to large-scale scenarios. This degradation arises from the distributional shift between training and testing data, rendering policies learned on small instances ineffective for larger problems. To overcome this limitation, we introduce a novel learning framework driven by Large Language Models (LLMs). This framework learns a projection between the training and testing distributions, which is then deployed to enhance the scalability of the NCO model. Notably, unlike prevailing techniques that necessitate joint training with the neural network, our approach operates exclusively during the inference phase, obviating the need for model retraining. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method enables a backbone model (trained on 100-node instances) to achieve superior performance on large-scale Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) and Capacitated Vehicle Routing Problem (CVRP) of up to 100K nodes from diverse distributions.

We present a new algorithmic approach for the task of finding a chordal Markov network structure that maximizes a given scoring function. The algorithm is based on branch and bound and integrates dynamic programming for both domain pruning and for obtaining strong bounds for search-space pruning. Empirically, we show that the approach dominates in terms of running times a recent integer programming approach (and thereby also a recent constraint optimization approach) for the problem.

Recent advances in bandit tools and techniques for sequential learning are steadily enabling new applications and are promising the resolution of a range of challenging related problems. We study the game tree search problem, where the goal is to quickly identify the optimal move in a given game tree by sequentially sampling its stochastic payoffs. We develop new algorithms for trees of arbitrary depth, that operate by summarizing all deeper levels of the tree into confidence intervals at depth one, and applying a best arm identification procedure at the root. We prove new sample complexity guarantees with a refined dependence on the problem instance. We show experimentally that our algorithms outperform existing elimination-based algorithms and match previous special-purpose methods for depth-two trees.

Non-convex optimization with local search heuristics has been widely used in machine learning, achieving many state-of-art results. It becomes increasingly important to understand why they can work for these NP-hard problems on typical data. The landscape of many objective functions in learning has been conjectured to have the geometric property that ``all local optima are (approximately) global optima'', and thus they can be solved efficiently by local search algorithms. However, establishing such property can be very difficult. In this paper, we analyze the optimization landscape of the random over-complete tensor decomposition problem, which has many applications in unsupervised leaning, especially in learning latent variable models.

Guided policy search algorithms can be used to optimize complex nonlinear policies, such as deep neural networks, without directly computing policy gradients in the high-dimensional parameter space. Instead, these methods use supervised learning to train the policy to mimic a "teacher" algorithm, such as a trajectory optimizer or a trajectory-centric reinforcement learning method. Guided policy search methods provide asymptotic local convergence guarantees by construction, but it is not clear how much the policy improves within a small, finite number of iterations. We show that guided policy search algorithms can be interpreted as an approximate variant of mirror descent, where the projection onto the constraint manifold is not exact. We derive a new guided policy search algorithm that is simpler and provides appealing improvement and convergence guarantees in simplified convex and linear settings, and show that in the more general nonlinear setting, the error in the projection step can be bounded. We provide empirical results on several simulated robotic manipulation tasks that show that our method is stable and achieves similar or better performance when compared to prior guided policy search methods, with a simpler formulation and fewer hyperparameters.

Given a task of predicting Y from X, a loss function L, and a set of probability distributions Gamma on (X,Y), what is the optimal decision rule minimizing the worst-case expected loss over Gamma? In this paper, we address this question by introducing a generalization of the maximum entropy principle. Applying this principle to sets of distributions with marginal on X constrained to be the empirical marginal, we provide a minimax interpretation of the maximum likelihood problem over generalized linear models as well as some popular regularization schemes. For quadratic and logarithmic loss functions we revisit well-known linear and logistic regression models. Moreover, for the 0-1 loss we derive a classifier which we call the minimax SVM. The minimax SVM minimizes the worst-case expected 0-1 loss over the proposed Gamma by solving a tractable optimization problem. We perform several numerical experiments to show the power of the minimax SVM in outperforming the SVM.