Synthetic data augmentation is widely used to mitigate class imbalance, but its theoretical effects on score-based classification remain poorly understood. This paper develops a framework for characterizing when synthetic minority augmentation can improve threshold-integrated and threshold-optimized metrics, including AUROC, AUPRC, best-threshold balanced accuracy, and best-threshold \(\F_1\) score. We separate the effect of augmentation into two components: a change in effective class weighting and a discrepancy between the synthetic and true minority distributions. Under well-specified score models, the raw estimator already targets the likelihood-ratio ordering, which is population-optimal for the metrics considered. Consequently, augmentation cannot provide a fundamental population-level improvement beyond possible finite-sample variance reduction, and may introduce additional bias through synthetic distributional error. We further establish minimax lower bounds showing that the raw estimator already achieves the optimal metric-regret rate in the well-specified regime. Under misspecification, however, augmentation can play a qualitatively different role: by changing the effective class balance, it can alter the restricted-class projection and correct ranking errors induced by the raw imbalanced objective. We provide explicit improvement bounds quantifying the roles of approximation error, finite-sample estimation error, and synthetic distributional error. Simulation studies corroborate the theory, demonstrating limited gains under well-specification and nontrivial but nonmonotone improvements under misspecification.

Two narratives about machine learning ecosystems grew out of the recent algorithmic fairness discourse. In one, dubbed monoculture, algorithmic ecosystems tend toward homogeneity akin to a single model making all decisions. Individuals then face the risk of systematic exclusion with no recourse. In the other, model multiplicity, many models solve the same task with similar accuracy, causing excessive variation in individual outcomes. Both narratives are compelling, yet, seemingly at odds: model multiplicity can't materialize in a strict monoculture.

Progress in a research field can be hard to assess, in particular when many concurrent methods are proposed in a short period of time. This is the case in digital pathology, where many foundation models have been released recently to serve as feature extractors for tile-level images, being used in a variety of downstream tasks, both for tile-and slide-level problems. Benchmarking available methods then becomes paramount to get a clearer view of the research landscape. In particular, in critical domains such as healthcare, a benchmark should not only focus on evaluating downstream performance, but also provide insights about the main differences between methods, and importantly, further consider uncertainty and robustness to ensure a reliable usage of proposed models. For these reasons, we introduce THUNDER, a tile-level benchmark for digital pathology foundation models, allowing for efficient comparison of many models on diverse datasets with a series of downstream tasks, studying their feature spaces and assessing the robustness and uncertainty of predictions informed by their embeddings. THUNDER is a fast, easy-to-use, dynamic benchmark that can already support a large variety of state-of-the-art foundation, as well as local user-defined models for direct tile-based comparison. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive comparison of 23 foundation models on 16 different datasets covering diverse tasks, feature analysis, and robustness.

As a result, a naïve ERM learning process will be biased towards the majority classes, making it difficult to generalize to the minority classes.

Neolithic period to the Industrial Revolution and includes information reviewed and assembled by history experts and graduate research assistants.

Classification of functional data where observations are curves or trajectories poses unique challenges, particularly under severe class imbalance. Traditional Random Forest algorithms, while robust for tabular data, often fail to capture the intrinsic structure of functional observations and struggle with minority class detection. This paper introduces Functional Random Forest with Adaptive Cost-Sensitive Splitting (FRF-ACS), a novel ensemble framework designed for imbalanced functional data classification. The proposed method leverages basis expansions and Functional Principal Component Analysis (FPCA) to represent curves efficiently, enabling trees to operate on low dimensional functional features. To address imbalance, we incorporate a dynamic cost sensitive splitting criterion that adjusts class weights locally at each node, combined with a hybrid sampling strategy integrating functional SMOTE and weighted bootstrapping. Additionally, curve specific similarity metrics replace traditional Euclidean measures to preserve functional characteristics during leaf assignment. Extensive experiments on synthetic and real world datasets including biomedical signals and sensor trajectories demonstrate that FRF-ACS significantly improves minority class recall and overall predictive performance compared to existing functional classifiers and imbalance handling techniques. This work provides a scalable, interpretable solution for high dimensional functional data analysis in domains where minority class detection is critical.

We transform large-scale Swedish register data into textual life trajectories to address two long-standing challenges in data analysis: high cardinality of categorical variables and inconsistencies in coding schemes over time. Leveraging this uniquely comprehensive population register, we convert register data from 6.9 million individuals (2001-2013) into semantically rich texts and predict individuals' residential mobility in later years (2013-2017). These life trajectories combine demographic information with annual changes in residence, work, education, income, and family circumstances, allowing us to assess how effectively such sequences support longitudinal prediction. We compare multiple NLP architectures (including LSTM, DistilBERT, BERT, and Qwen) and find that sequential and transformer-based models capture temporal and semantic structure more effectively than baseline models. The results show that textualized register data preserves meaningful information about individual pathways and supports complex, scalable modeling. Because few countries maintain longitudinal microdata with comparable coverage and precision, this dataset enables analyses and methodological tests that would be difficult or impossible elsewhere, offering a rigorous testbed for developing and evaluating new sequence-modeling approaches. Overall, our findings demonstrate that combining semantically rich register data with modern language models can substantially advance longitudinal analysis in social sciences.

Evaluating rare-event forecasts is challenging because standard metrics collapse as event prevalence declines. Measures such as F1-score, AUPRC, MCC, and accuracy induce degenerate thresholds -- converging to zero or one -- and their values become dominated by class imbalance rather than tail discrimination. We develop a family of rare-event-stable (RES) metrics whose optimal thresholds remain strictly interior as the event probability approaches zero, ensuring coherent decision rules under extreme rarity. Simulations spanning event probabilities from 0.01 down to one in a million show that RES metrics maintain stable thresholds, consistent model rankings, and near-complete prevalence invariance, whereas traditional metrics exhibit statistically significant threshold drift and structural collapse. A credit-default application confirms these results: RES metrics yield interpretable probability-of-default cutoffs (4-9%) and remain robust under subsampling, while classical metrics fail operationally. The RES framework provides a principled, prevalence-invariant basis for evaluating extreme-risk forecasts.