We study the problem of likelihood maximization when the likelihood function is intractable but model simulations are readily available. We propose a sequential, gradient-based optimization method that directly models the Fisher score based on a local score matching technique which uses simulations from a localized region around each parameter iterate. By employing a linear parameterization to the surrogate score model, our technique admits a closed-form, least-squares solution. This approach yields a fast, flexible, and efficient approximation to the Fisher score, effectively smoothing the likelihood objective and mitigating the challenges posed by complex likelihood landscapes. We provide theoretical guarantees for our score estimator, including bounds on the bias introduced by the smoothing. Empirical results on a range of synthetic and real-world problems demonstrate the superior performance of our method compared to existing benchmarks.

Many critical applications, from autonomous scientific discovery to personalized medicine, demand systems that can both strategically acquire the most informative data and instantaneously perform inference based upon it. While amortized methods for Bayesian inference and experimental design offer part of the solution, neither approach is optimal in the most general and challenging task, where new data needs to be collected for instant inference. To tackle this issue, we introduce the Amortized Active Learning and Inference Engine (ALINE), a unified framework for amortized Bayesian inference and active data acquisition. ALINE leverages a transformer architecture trained via reinforcement learning with a reward based on self-estimated information gain provided by its own integrated inference component. This allows it to strategically query informative data points while simultaneously refining its predictions. Moreover, ALINE can selectively direct its querying strategy towards specific subsets of model parameters or designated predictive tasks, optimizing for posterior estimation, data prediction, or a mixture thereof. Empirical results on regression-based active learning, classical Bayesian experimental design benchmarks, and a psychometric model with selectively targeted parameters demonstrate that ALINE delivers both instant and accurate inference along with efficient selection of informative points.

In many settings in science and industry, such as drug discovery and clinical trials, a central challenge is designing experiments under time and budget constraints. Bayesian Optimal Experimental Design (BOED) is a paradigm to pick maximally informative designs that has been increasingly applied to such problems. During training, BOED selects inputs according to a pre-determined acquisition criterion. During testing, the model learned during training encounters a naturally occurring distribution of test samples. This leads to an instance of covariate shift, where the train and test samples are drawn from different distributions. Prior work has shown that in the presence of model misspecification, covariate shift amplifies generalization error. Our first contribution is to provide a mathematical decomposition of generalization error that reveals key contributors to generalization error in the presence of model misspecification. We show that generalization error under misspecification is the result of, in addition to covariate shift, a phenomenon we term error (de-)amplification which has not been identified or studied in prior work. Our second contribution is to provide a detailed empirical analysis to show that methods that result in representative and de-amplifying training data increase generalization performance. Our third contribution is to develop a novel acquisition function that mitigates the effects of model misspecification by including a term for representativeness and implicitly inducing de-amplification. Our experimental results demonstrate that our method outperforms traditional BOED in the presence of misspecification.

Off-policy learning and evaluation leverage logged bandit feedback datasets, which contain context, action, propensity score, and feedback for each data point. These scenarios face significant challenges due to high variance and poor performance with low-quality propensity scores and heavy-tailed reward distributions. We address these issues by introducing a novel estimator based on the log-sum-exponential (LSE) operator, which outperforms traditional inverse propensity score estimators. Our LSE estimator demonstrates variance reduction and robustness under heavy-tailed conditions. For off-policy evaluation, we derive upper bounds on the estimator's bias and variance. In the off-policy learning scenario, we establish bounds on the regret -- the performance gap between our LSE estimator and the optimal policy -- assuming bounded $(1+ε)$-th moment of weighted reward. Notably, we achieve a convergence rate of $O(n^{-ε/(1+ ε)})$ for the regret bounds, where $ε\in [0,1]$ and $n$ is the size of logged bandit feedback dataset. Theoretical analysis is complemented by comprehensive empirical evaluations in both off-policy learning and evaluation scenarios, confirming the practical advantages of our approach. The code for our estimator is available at the following link: https://github.com/armin-behnamnia/lse-offpolicy-learning.

Although large language models (LLMs) are highly interactive and extendable, current approaches to ensure reliability in deployments remain mostly limited to rejecting outputs with high uncertainty in order to avoid misinformation. This conservative strategy reflects the current lack of tools to systematically distinguish and respond to different sources of uncertainty. In this paper, we advocate for the adoption of Bayesian Modeling of Experiments -- a framework that provides a coherent foundation to reason about uncertainty and clarify the reducibility of uncertainty -- for managing and proactively addressing uncertainty that arises in LLM deployments. This framework enables LLMs and their users to take contextually appropriate steps, such as requesting clarification, retrieving external information, or refining inputs. By supporting active resolution rather than passive avoidance, it opens the door to more reliable, transparent, and broadly applicable LLM systems, particularly in high-stakes, real-world settings.

This paper addresses the challenge of model uncertainty in quantitative finance, where decisions in portfolio allocation, derivative pricing, and risk management rely on estimating stochastic models from limited data. In practice, the unavailability of the true probability measure forces reliance on an empirical approximation, and even small misestimations can lead to significant deviations in decision quality. Building on the framework of Klibanoff et al. (2005), we enhance the conventional objective - whether this is expected utility in an investing context or a hedging metric - by superimposing an outer "uncertainty measure", motivated by traditional monetary risk measures, on the space of models. In scenarios where a natural model distribution is lacking or Bayesian methods are impractical, we propose an ad hoc subsampling strategy, analogous to bootstrapping in statistical finance and related to mini-batch sampling in deep learning, to approximate model uncertainty. To address the quadratic memory demands of naive implementations, we also present an adapted stochastic gradient descent algorithm that enables efficient parallelization. Through analytical, simulated, and empirical studies - including multi-period, real data and high-dimensional examples - we demonstrate that uncertainty measures outperform traditional mixture of measures strategies and our model-agnostic subsampling-based approach not only enhances robustness against model risk but also achieves performance comparable to more elaborate Bayesian methods.

Modern data marketplaces and data sharing consortia increasingly rely on incentive mechanisms to encourage agents to contribute data. However, schemes that reward agents based on the quantity of submitted data are vulnerable to manipulation, as agents may submit fabricated or low-quality data to inflate their rewards. Prior work has proposed comparing each agent's data against others' to promote honesty: when others contribute genuine data, the best way to minimize discrepancy is to do the same. Yet prior implementations of this idea rely on very strong assumptions about the data distribution (e.g. Gaussian), limiting their applicability. In this work, we develop reward mechanisms based on a novel, two-sample test inspired by the Cramér-von Mises statistic. Our methods strictly incentivize agents to submit more genuine data, while disincentivizing data fabrication and other types of untruthful reporting. We establish that truthful reporting constitutes a (possibly approximate) Nash equilibrium in both Bayesian and prior-agnostic settings. We theoretically instantiate our method in three canonical data sharing problems and show that it relaxes key assumptions made by prior work. Empirically, we demonstrate that our mechanism incentivizes truthful data sharing via simulations and on real-world language and image data.

We introduce Interactive Bayesian Distributional Robustness (IBDR), a novel Bayesian inference framework that allows modeling the interactions between particles, thereby enhancing ensemble quality through increased particle diversity. IBDR is grounded in a generalized theoretical framework that connects the distributional population loss with the approximate posterior, motivating a practical dual optimization procedure that enforces distributional robustness while fostering particle diversity. We evaluate IBDR's performance against various baseline methods using the VTAB-1K benchmark and the common reasoning language task. The results consistently show that IBDR outperforms these baselines, underscoring its effectiveness in real-world applications.

Machine Learning (ML) models are increasingly integrated into safety-critical systems, such as autonomous vehicle platooning, to enable real-time decision-making. However, their inherent imperfection introduces a new class of failure: reasoning failures often triggered by distributional shifts between operational and training data. Traditional safety assessment methods, which rely on design artefacts or code, are ill-suited for ML components that learn behaviour from data. SafeML was recently proposed to dynamically detect such shifts and assign confidence levels to the reasoning of ML-based components. Building on this, we introduce a probabilistic safety assurance framework that integrates SafeML with Bayesian Networks (BNs) to model ML failures as part of a broader causal safety analysis. This allows for dynamic safety evaluation and system adaptation under uncertainty. We demonstrate the approach on an simulated automotive platooning system with traffic sign recognition.

We introduce an approach to topic modelling with document-level covariates that remains tractable in the face of large text corpora. This is achieved by de-emphasizing the role of parameter estimation in an underlying probabilistic model, assuming instead that the data come from a fixed but unknown distribution whose statistical functionals are of interest. We propose combining a convex formulation of non-negative matrix factorization with standard regression techniques as a fast-to-compute and useful estimate of such a functional. Uncertainty quantification can then be achieved by reposing non-parametric resampling methods on top of this scheme. This is in contrast to popular topic modelling paradigms, which posit a complex and often hard-to-fit generative model of the data. We argue that the simple, non-parametric approach advocated here is faster, more interpretable, and enjoys better inferential justification than said generative models. Finally, our methods are demonstrated with an application analysing covariate effects on discourse of flavours attributed to Canadian beers.