It has been recently shown that e-processes are sufficient for sequential testing in the following sense: every level-$α$ sequential test can be obtained by thresholding an e-process at $1/α$. However, in the above result, neither does the test have to be asymptotically optimal (in terms of stopping times) nor does the e-process have to be asymptotically log-optimal. It has separately been shown that asymptotically log-optimal e-processes yield asymptotically optimal sequential tests. In this paper, we prove the converse, arguably completing the story: it is possible to aggregate asymptotically optimal sequential tests into asymptotically log-optimal e-processes. This is accomplished by using a new class of WAIT e-processes: those that are Weighted Aggregates of Indicators of stopping Times that begin at zero, are nondecreasing and increase to infinity under the alternative at the optimal rate. Importantly, the paper discusses several nuances in the varied definitions of asymptotic (log-)optimality.

We provide practical, efficient, and nonparametric methods for auditing the fairness of deployed classification and regression models. Whereas previous work relies on a fixed-sample size, our methods are sequential and allow for the continuous monitoring of incoming data, making them highly amenable to tracking the fairness of real-world systems. We also allow the data to be collected by a probabilistic policy as opposed to sampled uniformly from the population. This enables auditing to be conducted on data gathered for another purpose. Moreover, this policy may change over time and different policies may be used on different subpopulations. Finally, our methods can handle distribution shift resulting from either changes to the model or changes in the underlying population. Our approach is based on recent progress in anytime-valid inference and game-theoretic statistics--the "testing by betting" framework in particular. These connections ensure that our methods are interpretable, fast, and easy to implement. We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach on three benchmark fairness datasets.

Suppose we observe data from a distribution $P$ and we wish to test the composite null hypothesis that $P\in\mathscr P$ against a composite alternative $P\in \mathscr Q\subseteq \mathscr P^c$. Herbert Robbins and coauthors pointed out around 1970 that, while no batch test can have a level $α\in(0,1)$ and power equal to one, sequential tests can be constructed with this fantastic property. Since then, and especially in the last decade, a plethora of sequential tests have been developed for a wide variety of settings. However, the literature has not yet provided a clean and general answer as to when such power-one sequential tests exist. This paper provides a remarkably general sufficient condition (that we also prove is not necessary). Focusing on i.i.d. laws in Polish spaces without any further restriction, we show that there exists a level-$α$ sequential test for any weakly compact $\mathscr P$, that is power-one against $\mathscr P^c$ (or any subset thereof). We show how to aggregate such tests into an $e$-process for $\mathscr P$ that increases to infinity under $\mathscr P^c$. We conclude by building an $e$-process that is asymptotically relatively growth rate optimal against $\mathscr P^c$, an extremely powerful result.

Inrealisticscenarios with very limited numbers of data samples, it can be challenging to identify a kernel powerful enough to distinguish complex distributions.

Given Assumptions 1-4 in Giordanoetal.

ARacknowledgesfundingfroman Adobe Faculty Research Award, andan NSFDMS 1916320 grant.

Agentic AI systems execute a sequence of actions, such as reasoning steps or tool calls, in response to a user prompt. To evaluate the success of their trajectories, researchers have developed verifiers, such as LLM judges and process-reward models, to score the quality of each action in an agent's trajectory. Although these heuristic scores can be informative, there are no guarantees of correctness when used to decide whether an agent will yield a successful output. Here, we introduce e-valuator, a method to convert any black-box verifier score into a decision rule with provable control of false alarm rates. We frame the problem of distinguishing successful trajectories (that is, a sequence of actions that will lead to a correct response to the user's prompt) and unsuccessful trajectories as a sequential hypothesis testing problem. E-valuator builds on tools from e-processes to develop a sequential hypothesis test that remains statistically valid at every step of an agent's trajectory, enabling online monitoring of agents over arbitrarily long sequences of actions. Empirically, we demonstrate that e-valuator provides greater statistical power and better false alarm rate control than other strategies across six datasets and three agents. We additionally show that e-valuator can be used for to quickly terminate problematic trajectories and save tokens. Together, e-valuator provides a lightweight, model-agnostic framework that converts verifier heuristics into decisions rules with statistical guarantees, enabling the deployment of more reliable agentic systems.

We present a generic approach to constructing a frequentist CS using Bayesian tools, based on the fact that the ratio of a prior to the posterior at the ground truth is a martingale. We then present Hoeffding-and empirical-Bernstein-type time-uniform CSs and fixed-time confidence intervals for sampling WoR, which improve on previous bounds in the literature and explicitly quantify the benefit of WoR sampling.