We propose a scaling law that takes into account model size and training data while explicitly splitting the latter into training steps and batch size (called three-term law). Fitting the proposed law on a large set of training runs, we find that it correctly recovers the scaling of the optimal batch size. Moreover, because it makes use of training runs with suboptimal batch size, our proposed law can be robustly fit with a significantly smaller amount of training runs. We further show that the three-term law can be used to derive scaling laws for suboptimal batch sizes, and that it matches previous empirical findings related to the critical batch size.

Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) commonly assume a standard isotropic Gaussian prior over the latent space, an assumption that often fails to capture the true distribution of latent representations for complex datasets. This mismatch can limit reconstruction accuracy, reduce sample quality, and constrain the expressive power of the learned latent space. We propose the eXact-Prior Variational Autoencoder (X-VAE), a framework that replaces the conventional standard normal prior with a Gaussian prior derived from the latent representations of a pretrained autoencoder (AE). Specifically, the empirical mean and standard deviation of the AE latent codes are used to parameterize a data-adaptive prior that more closely reflects the underlying structure of the training data. During generation, X-VAE introduces a latent scaling factor that enables explicit control over the variance of the sampled latent vectors, providing a simple mechanism for balancing sample diversity and fidelity. This flexibility makes the proposed approach particularly well suited for applications such as industrial and engineering design, where generated solutions must satisfy strict structural or functional constraints while still permitting meaningful design exploration. We present the mathematical formulation of well-suited X-VAE, derive the corresponding KL divergence objective for the proposed prior, and evaluate the method on standard benchmark datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that X-VAE preserves reconstruction quality while producing latent representations that better align with the empirical data distribution, leading to improved controllability and more realistic generated samples.

Machine learning algorithms and their training datasets have grown substantially in both size and complexity over the past decade. This increased model complexity has made it challenging to interpret and predict their behavior in unobserved scenarios. Hence, many applications that involve societal decisions still rely on simple, interpretable models like linear regression, often after feature engineering. Examples of such applications include predicting national housing prices, estimating wages across industries, forecasting loan amounts across banks, predicting life insurance premiums across groups, and projecting energy consumption across communities [CGKMN24]. A shared safety and sometimes legal concern across the above applications is the potential for wildly different model qualities for different distributions, i.e., outputting a notably worse model for some source data distributions [Dat14; BS16; HPS16; VVB18; SBFVV19; BHJKR21; CGNSG23; Cho16; KLMR18; ADW19; CGKMN24; SVWZ24].

Abstractitations, recent work explores online RLHF that iterates between generating on-policy responses and collecting preferences [Lee et al., 2024, Park et al., 2022]. Among online The Self-Improving Alignment (SAIL) algorithmapproaches, SAIL reduces a bilevel alignment formulation addresses distribution shift by reducing a bilevelto a computationally efficient single-level surrogate and formulation of the problem to an efficient, single-reports strong empirical gains [Ding et al., 2024]. Empirically, SAIL has demonstratedisting online pipelines are largely heuristic and do not anastrong performance on this task. However, a for-lytically control the distributional shift induced by iterative mal analysis of its convergence properties has beendata collection [Chakraborty et al., 2024, Shen et al., 2024], lacking. We identify a key theoretical challenge: which has been linked to suboptimal performance in practice the standard SAIL objective function is not guar- [Sharma et al., 2024]. To address this limita-A growing line of work argues that the coupling between tion, we propose a regularized objective, SAILreward learning and policy updates is fundamentally bilevel and should be modeled as such [Chakraborty et al., 2024].RevKL, which incorporates a reverse KullbackAs a follow-up, Ding et al. [2024] reduces the bilevel align-Leibler (KL) divergence penalty to improve the optimization landscape. Our central theoretical con-ment objective to a tractable single-level surrogate and retribution is to prove that this regularized objectiveports strong empirical gains, yet it lacks formal convergence satisfies the Polyak-Lojasiewicz (PL) conditionguarantees. Related theoretical analyses in bilevel/RLHFstyle problems exist [e.g., Yang et al., 2025, Chakrabortywithin a bounded parameter space. We establish et al., 2024, Gaur et al., 2025], yet they either focus onglobal convergence guarantees, achieving a nearlinear sample complexity.

People overthink; language models over-sample, and the extra effort can talk both into a worse answer. Reasoning systems answer a hard question by sampling it many times (test-time scaling), and the more they draw, the more often a correct answer turns up somewhere, so coverage, the fraction of problems with at least one correct try, climbs and appears to be progress. But a deployed system must return one answer, and choosing it, not knowing which try is right, is selection; selection is capped, and past a point extra samples only make the model surer of a confident mistake, even as every draw adds cost. The gap between climbing coverage and stalled selection, the identifiability gap, is the answer a model can produce but not pick. So the real question is not whether to sample but how far, and the answer is: not far. For picking an answer, the vote has already settled within a few dozen draws, the modal ceiling; for scoring a benchmark, sooner still, the correlation ceiling. Beyond that, extra draws cost compute and add nothing, and can even make the answer worse. This paper turns the cutoff into a single number, the effective number of samples, that any sampling run already reveals. The bottleneck is recognizing a right answer, not generating one.

Conformal prediction guarantees marginal coverage, but pooled calibration averages over heterogeneous regions and can mask regional undercoverage in safety-critical subgroups. We introduce Self-Organized Conformal Prediction (SOCP), a calibration scheme that discovers input-space groups with a Self-Organizing Map (SOM) and, at test time, draws a local calibration buffer from the query's best-matching unit (BMU) cell or a fixed grid neighborhood. The same retrieval rule applies to regression and classification tasks across tabular features and image embeddings, leaving the predictor and nonconformity score untouched. SOCP gives exact validity for BMU-cell retrieval and fixed retrieved-set validity for neighborhood buffers; central-cell validity for neighborhood retrieval holds up to a Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) bias term. A split-routed extension recovers fixed retrieved-set validity conditional on the routing split. On eight regression and classification benchmarks, SO-SCP reduces the weighted regional coverage gap on $7/8$ datasets (mean paired change $-7.1\%$) for a mean prediction-set size increase of $6.2\%$, with negligible overhead on the largest six datasets; SO-CQR yields smaller gains, since quantile regression already absorbs much of the heterogeneity. By learning groups directly from the input geometry, SOCP provides group-local calibration with exact fixed-group guarantees and approximate central-cell guarantees, without supervised partitions or predictor retraining.

Contrastive embedding models trained with scale-invariant losses are typically paired with distance metrics like cosine similarity, effectively ignoring embedding magnitudes. However, surprisingly, empirical studies reveal that despite this, these "discarded" norms seem to correlate with semantic properties such as concept specificity, token frequency, and human uncertainty. In this work, we provide a formal theoretical framework explaining this phenomenon. By analyzing the optimization dynamics, we derive an analytic formula demonstrating that embedding length naturally encodes this information as a byproduct of the training process. We also show how this gives rise to signals that can serve as "free" calibration tools in specific models and retrieval tasks, providing a grounded explanation for a previously heuristic observation.

Conservative offline training is widely advocated as a safe foundation for subsequent online adaptation: if a policy stays close to well-supported behaviour, the argument goes, it is less likely to exploit imperfections in a learned reward model. We challenge this intuition empirically and mechanistically. We train a Qwen3-14B policy under Direct Preference Optimisation (DPO) with three levels of conservatism ($β\in \{β_{\mathrm{lo}}, β_{\mathrm{mid}}, β_{\mathrm{hi}}\}$ derived from empirical log-ratio percentiles), then adapt each checkpoint online against a learned reward ensemble (3\,$\times$\,Qwen3-1.7B) while measuring true performance on GSM8K exact-answer accuracy. We find that \emph{higher offline conservatism monotonically increases reward-hacking damage}, measured by the Goodhart gap and its area under the curve (AUGC), with Spearman $ρ= 1.0$ across all three conditions. Mechanistic analysis reveals a three-link causal chain: (i) high-$β$ DPO compresses policy entropy, (ii) Low-entropy policies generate responses with reduced diversity, concentrating in a narrow region of the reward model's training distribution (lower pairwise cosine distance), and (iii) despite this proximity, ensemble disagreement (epistemic uncertainty) increases with $β$ and is exploited faster during online optimisation. We further fit a power-law curve to the $(β, \augc)$ data and identify a practical optimal conservatism level $β^{\star}$ that balances alignment fidelity against hacking vulnerability. Our results suggest that the field needs \emph{calibrated}, not \emph{maximal}, conservatism.

Recent progress in flow-based generative modeling has led to models that output high-quality samples while using only a small number of function evaluations. However, at present, there is a lack of similar advances in estimating the model likelihood. In particular, most existing methods either rely on restrictive architectures that enable exact calculations, or use stochastic approximations such as Hutchinson's trace estimator that introduce substantial variance. In this work, we introduce SCAlable LikeLihood distillation of flOw maPs ( SCALLOP). SCALLOP builds on the recently proposed F2D2, a likelihood flow map model that can generate samples and their densities in a small number of function evaluations. While F2D2 uses Hutchinson's estimator during training, we introduce an alternative and more scalable likelihood distillation objective that is Hutchinson-free and admits a vectorized formulation. Empirically, we demonstrate the effectiveness of SCALLOP as a Boltzmann generator in molecular science, and further validate its benefit on image datasets. SCALLOP significantly reduces both training variance and training time while consistently improving performance compared to F2D2, and is competitive with the state-of-the-art while achieving up to 10 inference speedup over the fastest baseline.

Scientific discovery via symbolic regression is often viewed as statistically and computationally intractable because the hypothesis space of expressions grows combinatorially with depth. This paper revisits the statistical side through the lens of PAC learning, focusing on compositional function trees built from a finite vocabulary of smooth operators (e.g., $\{+,\times,\sin,\exp\}$ and affine maps). We prove that the relevant generalization quantity, Rademacher complexity, hence the excess risk, does not necessarily blow up exponentially with the number of distinct symbolic structures, but is controlled by (i) the depth $d$ and (ii) the Lipschitz constants of the base operators along the composed computation graph. Concretely, under mild Lipschitz conditions on operators and bounded affine leaves, a finite-union bound over a vocabulary of size $K=|\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{base}}|$ together with Maurer-type vector contraction yields $\mathfrak{R}_n(\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{comp}}^{d}) \leq (Kb\sqrt{2}L)^{d-1}\mathfrak{R}_n(\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{comp}}^{1})$ with arity bound $b$; corresponding high-probability risk bounds scale as $\mathcal{O}(L^{d}/\sqrt{n})$ when $K,b=O(1)$ and $\mathfrak{R}_n(\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{comp}}^{1})=O(n^{-1/2})$. We complement the theory with a modular codebase that trains differentiable operator trees (not MLPs) on synthetic "physics-like" targets of controlled depth and shows that the empirical generalization gap correlates positively with the predicted complexity term $(\widehat{L}^{d})/\sqrt{n}$.