The scaling exponent $α$ in neural scaling laws $L(N) \propto N^{-α}$ is commonly treated as a fixed constant set by architecture and data. We present evidence that $α$ depends systematically on the optimizer. In controlled random-feature regression experiments -- the canonical theoretical framework for neural scaling -- we measure $α$ across five optimizer variants and six spectral conditions. Preconditioned optimizers consistently yield steeper scaling (larger $α$), with the $α$-shift increasing across most of the tested spectral range, peaking near $s = 1.5$, and remaining large at $s = 2.0$. At $s \approx 1.0$ (characteristic of natural language), the full natural gradient achieves $α\approx 0.31$ versus $α\approx 0.12$ for gradient descent -- a $2.6\times$ larger fitted exponent that, within the random-feature model, compounds with each model-size doubling. Whether and how this exponent shift transfers to large-scale LLM training -- where recent evidence suggests the advantage may attenuate with scale -- remains an important open question. Our results imply that scaling-law forecasts should account for optimizer choice, and we provide a spectral diagnostic predicting when advanced optimizers will pay off.

Recent work in random matrix theory (RMT) has developed the notion of deterministic equivalents: typically linear surrogate models that approximate the spectral behavior of large nonlinear random matrices, such as nonlinear feature maps in neural networks (NNs). On the one hand, these deterministic equivalents make theoretical predictions tractable by reducing a complex model to a simpler model with properties that fall under the umbrella of classical RMT tools. However, this leaves open the question of whether this idealized linear equivalence remains meaningful when dealing with high-dimensional nonlinearly separable data, such as performing clssification on nonlinearly separable data. Motivated by this, we consider the conjugate kernel (CK), which is the nonlinear feature map of a feedforward NN, under a canonical nonlinearly separable dataset, the XOR problem; and we use the study of informative outlier eigenvalues in the CK and whether their corresponding eigenvectors asymptotically align with XOR labels as a proxy for nonlinear learnability. We develop a robust quadratic equivalent to the spiked CK matrix that enables a precise analysis of emergent informative spikes, as one modifies various knobs common in ML practice: sample complexity, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), nonlinear activation choice, and pretrained features. In each of these scenarios, we derive a precise BBP-type phase transition in which linear classification via the CK eigenvectors becomes possible. Our analysis helps translate the power of deterministic equivalence tools in RMT to study problems of practical relevance in ML.

Modern statistical learning theory and deep learning characterize generalization primarily in terms of continuous capacity control (e.g., norm-based regularization, margin maximization, low-rank bias). While highly successful in continuous domains, deep learning consistently fails to extrapolate exact algorithmic or discrete algebraic rules, reflecting a missing inductive bias toward algorithmic complexity minimization. We propose the Cayley-table completion as the canonical testbed for this missing bias, serving as the discrete algebraic counterpart to matrix completion. Just as matrix factorization combined with weight decay yields an implicit geometric bias toward low linear rank, recent results demonstrate that operator-valued tensor factorizations paired with a flatness prior yield an implicit algorithmic bias toward exact discrete associativity. We pose the open problem of establishing formal exact recovery bounds for Cayley-table completion, and challenge the community to generalize continuous flatness priors to autonomously discover broader discrete algorithmic axioms without combinatorial search.

Many applications require statistically valid inference across many related "tasks", while using only a handful of high-quality labels per hypothesis. In AI evaluation, these tasks may correspond to model behaviors across prompts, subgroups, or hypotheses; in social science surveys, they may correspond to related questions, populations, or measurement conditions. Prediction-powered inference (PPI) uses abundant but inexpensive proxy measurements to improve inference from limited, "ground-truth" labels, but commonly used methods treat tasks independently and therefore fail to exploit shared structure across related tasks. This limitation is especially important in settings where only a small number of labels are available per task. To address this issue, we introduce a multi-task prediction-powered inference framework that uses labeled data from related tasks to improve power while preserving task-specific inference. Our methods exploit the shared structure in the proxy-ground-truth relationship through cross-task recalibration, while retaining within-task rectification and power tuning to construct accurate point estimates and confidence intervals. We prove that efficiency gains beyond power-tuned PPI are only possible when the proxy-ground-truth relationship contains nonlinear structure; affine cross-task recalibrations are asymptotically equivalent to using the original proxy. We complement our theoretical findings with experiments on synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets, as well as a case study auditing language models on election-related information during the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Using a large human-annotation study, we show that cross-task recalibration can substantially reduce confidence interval widths when labels are scarce.

We study contextual bandits in the stochastic i.i.d.\ setting, where a learner observes contexts drawn from an unknown distribution, selects actions from a finite set $A$, and aims to identify an approximately optimal policy from a given class based on bandit feedback. Motivated by bandit multiclass classification with zero-one rewards, we focus on the \emph{$s$-sparse} setting in which, for every context, the reward vector has $L_1$-norm at most $s \ll |A|$. Our main result is the design of algorithms that, with high probability, output an $ε$-optimal policy compared to policy class $Π$ using $\tilde{O} ((s/ε^2 + |A|/ε)\log |Π|/δ)$ samples. We extend this bound to general Natarajan classes and complement it with a matching lower bound (up to logarithmic factors), thereby closing a substantial gap left by prior work (Erez et al., 2024, 2025), which incurred an additional $Θ(|A|^9)$ dependence. We obtain these results via two complementary approaches. First, we analyze contextual bandits through the lens of contextual decision making with structured observations, designing an exploration-by-optimization algorithm whose sample complexity is governed by the \emph{decision-estimation coefficient} (DEC; Foster et al., 2021, 2022). We show that, with $s$-sparse rewards, the induced model class admits a sharp DEC bound that scales with $s$ and directly yields the optimal rate. Since this approach is largely information-theoretic and involves solving complex min-max optimization problems, we also develop a second, more specialized algorithmic method based on a low-variance exploration technique. This approach leads to concrete, tractable algorithms and naturally extends to contextual combinatorial semi-bandits, leading to improved sample complexity guarantees for bandit multiclass list classification.

Language model reasoning traces are rarely all-or-nothing; they frequently contain valid intermediate steps before a critical error occurs. Existing uncertainty quantification methods typically certify final answers or entire responses, failing to provide statistical guarantees for the proportion of a sequential trace that can be safely retained. To address this, we introduce CROP (Conformal Reasoning Output Prefixes), a verifier-agnostic calibration procedure for clean-prefix certification. Given any step-level risk proxy, CROP selects a calibrated threshold and returns the longest contiguous prefix whose step risk proxies remain below it, routing the uncertified suffix for downstream review or repair. Assuming exchangeability, CROP rigorously controls the marginal probability that the returned prefix contains an annotated error. Across six process-labeled reasoning datasets, we demonstrate that standard step-level metrics such as AUROC do not fully capture prefix utility, suggesting verifiers should instead be evaluated by certified prefix length. Furthermore, CROP balances over- and under-withholding, improving downstream repair accuracy by preserving valid intermediate reasoning while discarding misleading suffixes. Ultimately, this work positions prefix certification as a rigorous, practical bridge between process supervision, abstention, and repair.

Score-based diffusion models have demonstrated remarkable empirical success in learning high-dimensional distributions, particularly those exhibiting low-dimensional and multi-modal structures. However, theoretical understanding of their statistical efficiency remains limited. Existing theories typically rely on strong regularity assumptions, such as uniformly bounded densities or globally smooth score functions, which fail to capture such intrinsic structures. In this work, we study the sample complexity of diffusion models for learning distributions supported on a union of low-dimensional subspaces. Assuming that the data distribution within each subspace is subgaussian, we show that diffusion models require at most $\widetilde{O}(\varepsilon^{-k \vee 2})$ samples to achieve $\varepsilon$ error in 1-Wasserstein distance, where $k$ is the intrinsic dimension. This near-optimal convergence rate depends only on the intrinsic dimension and significantly improves upon prior theoretical guarantees that suffer from the curse of dimensionality. Notably, our analysis applies to a broad collection of distributions without imposing smoothness, bounded-density, or log-concavity assumptions. Overall, our results show that diffusion models can statistically adapt to intrinsic low-dimensional structure while naturally accommodating multi-modal data, offering a rigorous theoretical justification for their success in complex high-dimensional learning tasks.

Frontier reasoning models are produced by posttraining base language models with reinforcement learning. Recent work has challenged this by showing that sampling from a sharpened version of the base model's distribution, a so-called power distribution, elicits comparable reasoning without additional training, curated datasets, or verifiers. However, making this method practical requires efficiently sampling from the power distribution. A sampler needs to "mix" to the power distribution, which necessitates moving between modes of the target distribution; intuitively, e.g., trying different reasoning strategies. The samplers proposed in prior works repeatedly select a "cut" position in the current reasoning trace uniformly at random and resample the suffix from that position onward. However, reasoning traces typically contain a few consequential decisions (e.g., the choice of proof strategy or algorithm), and we observe that a uniformly chosen cut tends to rewrite local details rather than revisit decision points. We introduce an algorithm (Entropy-Cut Metropolis-Hastings) that uses the base model's next-token entropy as a proxy to identify key decision points and resample from those positions. We empirically verify that entropy jumps are a useful proxy for decision points and, in a stylized model of reasoning, prove that our method's mixing time scales with the number of decisions in a trace rather than with the number of tokens, which can be much larger. Across MATH500, HumanEval, GPQA Diamond, and AIME26, our method consistently improves over baselines and RL-trained models.

Existing training approaches for large language models learn a single set of parameters, based on large volumes of data, which is typically heterogeneous, conflicting and often outright contradictory. As a result, the model is forced to compress conflicting goals, and inherent uncertainties into a single, averaged pattern of behaviour. We propose an $α$-Rényi variational framework for learning distributions over post-training parameters, offering an uncertainty-aware alternative to deep ensemble approaches. The resulting variational objective interpolates between classical variational Bayes and predictively oriented posterior learning, balancing between globally plausible individual models against systems of complementary specialists. We identify local stability criteria, demonstrating how model misspecification can make non-degenerate posterior spread locally favourable, manifesting contradictory or conflicting data as epistemic uncertainty. We apply our framework to LLM post-training, learning an ensemble of LoRA adapters attached to a shared, frozen base model, providing a scalable training procedure for both supervised fine-tuning and preference optimisation. Our approach enables training examples to be softly routed across ensemble members, promoting model specialisation and providing actionable uncertainty estimates across different tasks.

A striking geometric disparity has long persisted in the practice of deep learning. While modern neural network architectures naturally exhibit rich symmetry and equivariance properties, popular optimizers such as Adam and its variants operate inherently coordinate-wise, rendering them unable to respect the equivariance structures of the parameter space. We address this disparity by introducing a symmetry-compatible principle for optimizer design: the gradient update rule should be equivariant under the symmetry group acting on the corresponding weight block. Following this principle, we first provide a unified perspective on bi-orthogonally equivariant updates for general matrix layers, as employed by stochastic spectral descent, Muon, Scion, and polar gradient methods. More importantly, by moving from orthogonal groups to permutation and shared-shift symmetries, we derive symmetry-compatible optimizers for parameter blocks whose symmetries differ from those of general matrix layers: embedding and LM head matrices, SwiGLU MLP projections, and MoE router matrices. These constructions include one-sided spectral, row-norm, hybrid row-norm/spectral, row-aware, column-aware, centered row-norm, and left-spectral updates. They yield an end-to-end layerwise optimizer stack in which each major matrix-valued parameter class is assigned an update whose equivariance matches its symmetry group. We corroborate this principle through pre-training experiments on dense and sparse MoE language models, including Qwen3-0.6B-style, Gemma 3 1B-style, OLMoE-1B-7B-style, and downsized gpt-oss architectures. Across these experiments, symmetry-compatible update rules consistently improve final validation loss, reduce load imbalance in sparse MoE models, and in several cases improve training stability over the corresponding AdamW updates.