Federated Conformal RAG (FC-RAG) provides distribution-free coverage for a bandwidth-limited swarm of weak language models, but only at a fixed horizon. We extend it to anytime-valid sequential coverage: validity at every stopping time, preserved under predictable adaptive control (recalibration, per-node bandwidth escalation, distilled-student refresh), at no extra cost in assumptions over fixed-horizon FC-RAG. Naive composition fails because FC-RAG's marginal coverage bound makes the betting e-process a non-supermartingale on adverse calibration draws, and Ville's inequality cannot be invoked. We give Anytime-FC-RAG, a sequential extension built on a summable per-step calibration-deviation budget that converts the marginal bound into a strict conditional bound on a calibration-good event, paired with a truncated betting e-process that is a nonnegative supermartingale on the entire probability space. From these two ingredients, we obtain four guarantees: time-uniform alarm validity $\mathbb{P}(\sup_t E_t \ge 1/δ_e) \le δ_e + δ_{\mathrm{cal}}$, a Hoeffding-stitched cumulative-miscoverage envelope at the same total budget, safety under any predictable controller (recalibration, bandwidth escalation, student refresh), and training-side error propagation across an unbounded sequence of Federated Probe-Logit Distillation (FPLD) refreshes via a summable training budget. As a practical consequence, an adaptive controller that escalates retrieval bandwidth only when the e-process crosses a warning threshold matches the alarm rate of a fixed-high-bandwidth schedule at substantially lower communication cost. Experiments on a GPT-2-small + MiniLM swarm across MMLU, DBpedia, and AG News verify the predicted alarm rate, detection delay, envelope coverage, and $14$-$57\%$ bandwidth savings; the alarm fires when and only when coverage genuinely breaks.

Bayesian experimental design (BED) is a principled framework for data-efficient design of sequential experiments. However, existing BED methods are unable to adapt to dynamic constraints inherent in real-world tasks due to budget limitations, varying costs, or physical constraints that restrict how designs evolve over time. In this paper, we introduce a novel approach to BED that enables constrained optimization of experimental designs by combining offline pre-training of an amortized policy and a posterior network with online multi-step lookahead planning using scenario trees. We empirically demonstrate that our method yields substantially more informative design sequences than existing methods across a range of constrained BED tasks, while incurring only a modest additional computational overhead.

We propose PACE-GGM, a data-adaptive differentially private method for covariance estimation that concentrates its privacy budget on the most informative entries of the empirical covariance matrix, rather than perturbing all entries. This applies in the natural setting where the modeler supplies separate bounds for each variable, so that individual entries can be measured with less noise than the full matrix. In each round, our method selects a poorly approximated entry, measures it using the Gaussian mechanism, and then reconstructs a full covariance matrix using a maximum-entropy reconstruction objective, leading to a Gaussian graphical model structure. Experiments on diverse real-world datasets demonstrate consistent improvements in estimation error with respect to the Gaussian mechanism and other baselines, particularly in high-dimensional and low-to-moderate privacy regimes.

Frontier LLMs now perform strongly across a wide range of physics evaluations, but it is hard to disentangle genuine reasoning from recall of established science. We introduce DiscoverPhysics, an interactive benchmark that asks a LLM agent to discover the laws of motion of a simulated world whose physics deliberately deviates from our own. We construct 22 worlds governed by, among others, screened and fractional-power gravity, multi-species couplings, hidden dark-matter-like particles, non-coordinate-free physics, and time-varying interactions. Each world is generated on demand by an N-body simulator, for which the agent proposes several rounds of experiments, observes raw trajectory data, and ultimately submits both a natural-language explanation of the world's physics and a Python implementation of the inferred law. Because solving a world requires the agent to design informative experiments and revise its hypotheses, the benchmark probes long-horizon reasoning over an experimental history. We evaluate submissions along two complementary axes: trajectory MSE on held-out particles and an LLM-judged explanation score following an expert-written rubric assessing conceptual understanding of each world. Across eleven frontier models, we find that the strongest agents pass only half of the worlds and consistently fail on those where latent structure must be uncovered. Open-source models lag substantially behind commercial models, both in their ability to design informative experiments and in extracting conclusions from the data. We further find that good predictive accuracy does not guarantee high explanation quality and that conceptual understanding depends on hypothesis refinement through well-chosen experiments.

Shapley and Banzhaf interactions capture the complex dynamics inherent in modern machine learning applications. However, current estimators for these higher-order interactions trade off between speed and accuracy. To overcome this limitation, we introduce ProxySHAP. ProxySHAP reconciles the high sample efficiency of tree-based proxy models with a principled path to consistency via residual correction. On a theoretical level, we derive a polynomial-time generalization of interventional TreeSHAP to compute exact interaction indices for tree ensembles, successfully bypassing exponential tree-depth dependencies in prior methods. Furthermore, we formally analyze the residual adjustment strategy, characterizing the specific conditions under which Maximum Sample Reuse (MSR) corrects proxy bias without its variance scaling exponentially with interaction size. Extensive benchmarking demonstrates that ProxySHAP sets a new state-of-the-art standard for approximation quality, including in large-scale applications with thousands of features. By achieving the lowest error in both small- and large-budget regimes, ProxySHAP significantly outperforms the prior best estimators ProxySPEX and KernelSHAP-IQ, while also delivering superior performance on downstream explainability tasks.

A local specialist LLM, fine-tuned with reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) on operator-local data, is installed in a regulated organization with per-deployment error budget $α$. The operator needs a safety certificate for this deployment's stream at every round: no pooling across deployments, no waiting for a long-run average. Existing wrappers cannot deliver this on adaptive, online-updated streams: offline conformal-risk methods require exchangeability; online-conformal methods bound only long-run averages; non-exchangeable extensions are marginally valid; and the closest anytime wrapper, A-RCPS, controls marginal rather than selective risk. Using a (test statistic, validity guarantee, deployment rule) framework, we identify one empty cell forced by deployment requirements: e-process per threshold, selective risk, anytime-pathwise validity, max-certified-threshold rule. Conformal Selective Acting (CSA) fills it as a per-round wrapper maintaining a Ville-type e-process per threshold on a Bonferroni grid, evaluated against the RLVR filtration. Under predictable updates and isotonic-calibrated monotone risk we prove (i) an anytime-pathwise selective-risk bound $R_T^{\mathrm{act}}\leα+O(N_T^{-1/2})$, (ii) rate-optimal certification matching $Θ(\barη^{-2}\log(1/δ))$, and (iii) a horizon-independent release-rate gap. Across eight specialist benchmarks ($480$ streams), sixteen adversarial distribution-shift cells ($160$ streams), and five live Expert-Iteration RLVR cells with online LoRA over four base models in three architecture families ($10{,}300$ rounds), CSA is the only method among ten compared that satisfies pathwise validity and non-refusing deployment on every cell. We do not propose a new LLM, training algorithm, or policy class; CSA is the deployment-side complement, orthogonal to the model, for operators who cannot use a frontier API.

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has become a core post-training step for aligning large language models, yet the reward signal used in RLHF is only a learned proxy for true human utility. From an operations research perspective, this creates a decision problem under objective misspecification: the policy is optimized against an estimated reward, while deployment performance is determined by an unobserved objective. The resulting gap leads to reward over-optimization, or Goodharting, where proxy reward continues to improve even after true quality deteriorates. Existing mitigations address this problem through uncertainty penalties, pessimistic rewards, or conservative constraints, but they can be computationally burdensome and overly pessimistic. We propose Wasserstein distributionally robust regret optimization (DRRO) for RLHF. Instead of pessimizing worst-case value as in standard DRO, DRRO pessimizes worst-case regret relative to the best policy under the same plausible reward perturbation. We study the promptwise problem through a simplex allocation model and show that, under an $\ell_1$-ground-cost Wasserstein ambiguity set, the inner worst-case regret admits an exact solution and the optimal policy has a water-filling structure. These results lead to a practical policy-gradient algorithm with a simple sampled-bonus interpretation and only minor changes to GRPO-style RLHF training. The framework also clarifies theoretically why DRRO is less pessimistic than DRO, and our experiments show that DRRO mitigates over-optimization more effectively than existing baselines while standard DRO is systematically over-pessimistic.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automated evaluators of AI systems, including in high-stakes applications. In this role, LLMs are used to generate judgments about the quality, appropriateness, or even safety of model outputs. This approach is motivated by practical constraints. Expert human ratings are costly and difficult to scale, whereas LLM ratings can be produced quickly at low cost. However, current approaches to deploying LLM evaluators are ad hoc, typically limited to reporting agreement metrics between human and LLM judges as a justification for substitution of human ratings, and lack a formal basis for study design. This paper (1) shifts the role of the LLM judge from substitutive to auxiliary, and (2) formulates the LLM-as-a-judge paradigm as one of augmenting human evaluation through a two-stage sampling design, where LLM evaluations are measured for all observations at the first stage and human ratings are partially observed for a subsample at the second stage. We propose to use a doubly robust estimator from the missing data literature, which takes advantage of the robustness property against the prediction model, since the missingness model is known by design. Using the asymptotic variance of this estimator, we propose how sample sizes of human and LLM ratings can be determined to achieve a targeted level of power. We also show that a study can be efficiently designed by allocating more human ratings for types of evaluations where the predictability of LLM ratings is not high. To the best of our knowledge, there is very little guidance on how much human oversight should be retained when validating benchmarks.

We study multiple change point localization under bandit feedback. An unknown piecewise-constant function on a compact interval can be queried sequentially at adaptively chosen inputs, and each query returns a noisy evaluation of the function. The goal is to identify a prescribed number of discontinuities, known as change points, within a target precision $η$ and confidence level $1-δ$, while using as few samples as possible. We propose an adaptive algorithm that first detects intervals likely to contain change points and then refines their locations to precision $η$. We establish non-asymptotic upper bounds on its sample budget, together with corresponding lower bounds. Prior work shows that jump magnitudes alone determine the asymptotic sample complexity as $δ\to 0$. We reveal that this picture is incomplete beyond this regime. We demonstrate, both empirically and theoretically, that for general $δ$ and $η$, the complexity is jointly governed by the jumps and the relative positions of the change points.

Most exploration algorithms search broadly until uncertainty is resolved. When the action space is too large to resolve within budget, practitioners default to $\varepsilon$-greedy, which bounds disruption but spends its override blindly. We introduce \textit{Delight-gated exploration} (DE), a host--override rule that spends exploratory actions only when their prospective delight (expected improvement times surprisal) exceeds a gate price. This practical heuristic recovers a classical result: Pandora's reservation-value rule for costly search, with surprisal setting the effective inspection cost. Resolved arms exit the gate, fresh arms shut off above a prior-determined threshold, and selected linear-bandit overrides consume finite information budget. Across Bernoulli bandits, linear bandits, and tabular MDPs, the same hyperparameters transfer without retuning, and DE shows much weaker regret growth than Thompson Sampling and $\varepsilon$-greedy in the tested unresolved regimes. Delight improves acting for the same reason it improves learning: it prices scarce resources by the product of upside and surprisal.