assignment
Detecting Metastable Basins in High Dimensions via Marginal Trajectory Distribution Discrimination
We study the problem of identifying dynamically distinct basins of attraction in high dimensional time-homogeneous Markov processes using only trajectory sampling. This problem is fundamental in the analysis of metastable dynamical systems, where the process rapidly mixes within basins while transitions between basins occur rarely on the timescale of interest, or even when the state space is reducible. Existing approaches typically rely on spatial discretization or spectral analysis of estimated transition operators, which can become unreliable in high dimensional settings or when the underlying basin geometry is highly nonlinear. We propose a discriminative approach to basin identification based on marginal trajectory distribution comparison. We prove a simple risk separation result: if two initial states belong to the same basin, the Bayes-optimal classifier distinguishing their marginal trajectory distributions achieves risk close to 1/2, whereas if they lie in distinct basins, the optimal risk is close to zero. This observation reduces basin detection to a two-sample discrimination problem between marginal trajectory distributions. Motivated by this principle, we develop a neural algorithm that receives a set of candidate basin representatives and iteratively merges them by estimating classification risk with a neural network that approximates the Bayes classifier. We evaluate the method on various metastable systems. These include synthetic systems constructed by embedding low-dimensional dynamics into high dimensional noisy ambient spaces. In these settings, standard spectral and clustering-based methods often fail, while our approach accurately recovers the underlying basin structure. These results display a shortcoming of existing methods and highlight trajectory discrimination as an effective tool for identifying dynamical basins in high dimensional stochastic systems.
Learning Treatment Effects during Resource Allocation via Priority-Queue Randomization
Lee, JungHo, Sundberg, Johnna, Welle, Pim, Wilder, Bryan
Public service programs often allocate limited resources under uncertainty about their benefits, creating a need for randomization to support credible evaluation. In practice, however, applicants commonly enter waitlists where resources are prioritized toward individuals judged to have higher need through tiered priority queues, making direct randomization difficult. Motivated by this, we develop an experimental design framework for learning treatment effects while treating those most in need where incoming applicants are randomized into priority queues based on their assessed risk scores. Treatments are then provided across queues in priority order and first-in-first-out within queue as budget becomes available. Our contributions are two-fold. First, we characterize what causal effects are identified under this priority-queue allocation. When arrivals are exogenous, treatments are conditionally randomized, and hence standard estimands are identified; when arrivals are endogenous, queue randomization instead provides an instrument for treatment, identifying local treatment effects induced by the queuing process. Second, we develop optimized queue-assignment designs that trade off statistical efficiency against prioritizing higher-need applicants. We show in the process that, despite dependence in treatment assignments induced by the design, usual iid efficiency bounds remain well-justified design objectives. We illustrate the proposed designs using data from a housing allocation program in a large U.S. county.
On the Epistemic Uncertainty of Overparametrized Neural Networks
Epistemic uncertainty is often viewed as a reducible uncertainty that vanishes with increasing data. This perspective implicitly assumes parameter identifiability and equates epistemic uncertainty with predictive variability. In overparametrized neural networks, however, model parameters are typically non-identifiable due to symmetries and redundant representations. As a consequence, substantial parameter uncertainty can persist even when the underlying function is fully identified. In this work, we analyze epistemic uncertainty through the lens of non-identifiability and characterize both discrete and continuous sources of residual uncertainty. Focusing on one-hidden-layer ReLU networks, we thoroughly analyze the resulting posterior structure and validate our theoretical insights through empirical studies.
Fit CATE Once: Model-Assisted Randomization Tests Without Sample Splitting
Randomization tests and flexible treatment-effect models offer complementary strengths for analyzing data from randomized panel experiments: the former provide valid inference under the known assignment mechanism, while the latter can capture complex patterns of effect heterogeneity. We develop model-assisted randomization tests that combine these strengths without sample splitting. The key idea is to estimate an unsigned version of the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) from the covariance structure of residualized outcomes, while leaving the realized assignments for randomization inference. The remaining sign can be chosen to best fit the observed outcomes. We establish identification and consistency for the proposed unsigned CATE estimators, as well as validity for the CATE-assisted randomization tests. Across synthetic and semi-synthetic experiments, the CATE-assisted randomization tests control Type I error and achieve higher power than covariate-adjusted and sample-split alternatives. Finally, we show that the assignment-free CATE estimates can be used to discover heterogeneous subgroups and test subgroup-specific treatment effects.
Robustness of Refugee-Matching Gains to Off-Policy Evaluation Choices
Bansak, Kirk, Paulson, Elisabeth, Rothenhรคusler, Dominik, Ferwerda, Jeremy, Hainmueller, Jens, Hotard, Michael
Previous research has investigated the potential of refugee matching for boosting refugee outcomes, first considered by Bansak et al. (2018). This paper demonstrates the stability of counterfactual impact evaluation results in the context of refugee matching in the United States using a range of off-policy evaluation methods. In order to estimate counterfactual impact and test the robustness of our results, we employ several evaluation methods, including inverse probability weighting (IPW) and multiple variants of augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW). We also consider various modifications, including alternative modeling architectures and different assignment procedures. The impact estimates remain consistent in magnitude in all scenarios as well as statistically significant in most cases. Furthermore, the estimates are also consistent with the results originally presented in Bansak et al. (2018).
DARTS: Targeting Prognostic Covariates in Budget-Constrained Sequential Experiments
Husar, Kateryna, Volfovsky, Alexander
Randomized controlled trials typically assume that prognostic covariates are known and available at no cost. In practice, obtaining high-dimensional pretreatment data is costly, forcing a trade-off between covariate-adaptive precision and a measurement budget. We introduce Dynamic Adaptive Rerandomization via Thompson Sampling (DARTS), which treats covariate acquisition as a sequential optimization problem embedded within a design-based causal inference task. A budgeted combinatorial Thompson sampler learns which covariates are most prognostic across successive batches; selected covariates then drive rerandomization and regression adjustment to reduce batch-level average treatment effect variance. Our primary theoretical contribution is a decoupling result: adaptive covariate selection based on past batches preserves batch-level randomization validity, and the cumulative inverse-variance weighted estimator achieves at least nominal asymptotic coverage. We further derive a Bayes risk bound for the acquisition layer that matches the minimax lower bound up to logarithmic factors. Empirically, DARTS systematically concentrates the budget on informative features, significantly closing the efficiency gap to oracle designs while maintaining strict inferential validity.
The Manokhin Probability Matrix: A Diagnostic Framework for Classifier Probability Quality
The Brier score conflates two distinct properties of probabilistic predictions: reliability (calibration error) and resolution (discriminatory power). We introduce the Manokhin Probability Matrix, a BCG-style two-dimensional diagnostic framework that separates them. Classifiers are placed on a 2x2 grid by Spiegelhalter Z-statistic and AUC-ROC expected rank, then assigned to one of four archetypes: Eagle (good on both axes), Bull (strong discrimination, poor calibration), Sloth (well-calibrated, weak discriminator), and Mole (poor on both). Each archetype carries a distinct prescription. We populate the matrix from a large-scale empirical study spanning 21 classifiers, 5 post-hoc calibrators, and 30 real-world binary classification tasks from the TabArena-v0.1 suite. The assignment is unambiguous. CatBoost, TabICL, EBM, TabPFN, GBC, and Random Forest are Eagles. XGBoost, LightGBM, and HGB are Bulls; Venn-Abers calibration cuts log-loss by 6.5 to 12.6% on Bulls but degrades Eagles by 2.1%. SVM, LR, LDA, and the empirical base-rate predictor are Sloths. MLP, KNN, Naive Bayes, and ExtraTrees are Moles. A theoretical asymmetry follows: no order-preserving post-hoc calibrator can add discriminatory power (Proposition 1), so calibration is the fixable part and discrimination is the hard part. The practical rule is direct: do not optimise aggregate Brier score without first decomposing it; optimise discrimination first, then fix calibration post-hoc. Code and raw experimental data are available at https://github.com/valeman/classifier_calibration.
Anonymous and Copy-Robust Delegations for Liquid Democracy
Liquid democracy with ranked delegations is a novel voting scheme that unites the practicability of representative democracy with the idealistic appeal of direct democracy: Every voter decides between casting their vote on a question at hand or delegating their voting weight to some other, trusted agent. Delegations are transitive, and since voters may end up in a delegation cycle, they are encouraged to indicate not only a single delegate, but a set of potential delegates and a ranking among them. Based on the delegation preferences of all voters, a delegation rule selects one representative per voter. Previous work has revealed a trade-off between two properties of delegation rules called anonymity and copy-robustness. To overcome this issue we study two fractional delegation rules: MIXEDBORDA BRANCHING, which generalizes a rule satisfying copy-robustness, and the RANDOMWALKRULE, which satisfies anonymity. Using the Markov chain tree theorem, we show that the two rules are in fact equivalent, and simultaneously satisfy generalized versions of the two properties. Combining the same theorem with Fulkerson's algorithm, we develop a polynomial-time algorithm for computing the outcome of the studied delegation rule. This algorithm is of independent interest, having applications in semi-supervised learning and graph theory.