Fraud detection models in payment networks train on chargeback labels that are systematically biased. Every label must survive three sequential gates: authorization (declined transactions generate no labels), issuer reporting (unreported fraud is invisible), and delay (pending chargebacks are missing at training time). Labels that do arrive may be corrupted by first-party misuse or issuer misclassification. A companion paper [arXiv:2605.27557] proved that these four impairments impose a minimax lower bound on detection performance. This paper asks: can that bound be achieved? We formalize the observation pipeline as a sequential missing-data problem with three propensity stages and a corruption layer, and construct the Sequential Triply Robust (STR) estimator. The STR corrects for all four impairments simultaneously and achieves the semiparametric efficiency bound -- no estimator can have lower asymptotic variance. It is sequentially triply robust: at each gate, consistency requires only that either the propensity model or the outcome regression is correctly specified, not both. We provide corruption correction via noise-rate-adjusted pseudo-labels, empirical Bayes shrinkage to stabilize inverse-propensity weights for small issuers, a plug-in variance estimator yielding valid confidence intervals, and a Bernstein concentration inequality for finite-sample guarantees. On the operational side, we derive the optimal training delay -- the maturity window that minimizes the sum of label-quality loss and model staleness -- and prove that the STR permits training on data that is days old rather than months old, decoupling model freshness from the chargeback maturity cycle. The STR provably dominates naive chargeback-based training in mean squared error for any sample size.

Uniform sampling on implicitly defined manifolds is a core primitive in motion planning, constrained simulation, and probabilistic machine learning. MASEM addresses this problem by entropy-maximizing resampling, but its resampling weights depend on a local k-nearest-neighbour density estimate whose errors can be amplified by aggressive resampling temperatures. We ask whether a polynomial-maximization moment estimator can replace the plug-in density rule without changing the surrounding MASEM architecture. The proposed PMM-MASEM module computes shell spacings from nested k-nearest-neighbour radii, estimates their standardized cumulants, and uses a gated PMM2/PMM3 estimator only when the spacing distribution departs from the flat Exp(1) regime; otherwise it falls back to the plug-in/MLE rule. This fallback is essential: on a flat homogeneous manifold the plug-in estimator is already the MLE, so PMM should not outperform it. A local Known-DGP Monte Carlo experiment confirms this gate: the selector returns MLE on flat Exp(1) spacings and reduces density MSE by 22--36% on asymmetric gamma and boundary-spacing regimes. The evidence is not uniformly positive: PMM3 worsens a platykurtic uniform spacing law, and a lightweight resampling-proxy experiment improves seven-lobes coverage but degrades the sine and swiss-roll proxies. The current evidence therefore supports an applicability-boundary result rather than a general MASEM improvement claim.

We develop a mean-field theory of dropout as a perturbation of critical signal propagation at the edge of chaos. Dropout shifts the perfect-alignment fixed point, making the depth scale for information propagation finite even at critical initialization. We derive critical and crossover scaling laws for correlation decay and establish that smooth activations and kinked, ReLU-like activations constitute distinct universality classes, with different critical exponents and a universal two-parameter scaling collapse in detuning and dropout strength. The distinction traces to the analytic structure of the correlation map: smooth activations admit a Taylor expansion near perfect alignment, while kinked activations develop a branch point with universal non-analyticity. As a corollary, the framework yields saturated dropout profiles under fixed budget; a rank-flow tie-breaker then selects front-loaded schedules, substantially reducing held-out test loss at no extra computational cost, with accuracy gains as a consistent secondary effect. We test the predictions in MLPs and Vision Transformers and discuss CNN/ResNet extensions.

Preconditioned optimizers are central to language model training, but their stochastic update rules are usually treated as direct approximations to population preconditioned descent. We show that this view misses two finite-sample biases. First, the gradient and preconditioner are typically estimated from the same minibatch, introducing gradient--preconditioner coupling bias. Second, even when the preconditioner estimate is unbiased, its inverse or inverse-root is generally biased because inversion is nonlinear. We propose a single-batch bias-correction framework that addresses both effects: cross-fitted preconditioning estimates the numerator and preconditioner from independent microbatch groups, while variance-corrected inversion uses microbatch variability to subtract the leading delta-method bias term. The framework applies to diagonal moment, diagonal curvature, and matrix preconditioning methods, instantiated in AdamW, Sophia, and Shampoo. Bias correction reduces held-out pretraining loss on Qwen2.5-0.5B by $0.15$, $0.07$, and $0.11$ nats, respectively; the effects on mixed-quality pretraining and downstream instruction tuning are consistently neutral-to-positive. Together, these results establish bias correction as a practical mechanism for reducing finite-sample update bias and improving the performance of preconditioned optimizers.

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.

Joint-embedding predictive architectures (JEPAs) propose that a model should learn more useful abstractions when trained to predict latent representations rather than observed outputs. For autoregressive language-model fine-tuning the principle entails a stricter requirement: the induced hidden-state geometry must reach the language-model head \emph{and} improve the decoded task metric. We test that requirement under a fixed Llama-3.2-1B-Instruct LoRA harness on natural-language-to-regex generation, comparing twenty-two training-time auxiliaries across trajectory-shape regularisation, distributional constraints, predictor/target asymmetry, Fisher-metric Jacobi residuals, and a decoder-visible JEPA objective constructed to lie in cross-entropy's positive cone. The empirical answer is a structured null: several auxiliaries clear single-cell paired $α= 0.10$ without correction (T3-Local at $Δ= +2.53$~pp, $p = 0.003$ being the strongest), but none survives Bonferroni or Holm--Bonferroni at the relevant family-wise threshold, even though many change curvature, anisotropy, variance, and gradient direction. Decoder-visible JEPA yields the first positive auxiliary--cross-entropy gradient cosine in the study, yet exact match remains inside seed noise; a full-fine-tuning replication of the same auxiliary at $n = 5$ seeds reproduces the null on both benchmarks (TURK: $Δ= +0.04$~pp, $p_{\text{paired}} = 0.96$; SYNTH: $Δ= +0.52$~pp, $p_{\text{paired}} = 0.28$), so the null is robust across LoRA and full fine-tuning for the decoder-visible construction. Hidden-state representation work and decoded-task accuracy are therefore weakly coupled in this regime; we accordingly reframe LLM-domain JEPA evaluation as a coupling problem, in which the operative question is under which metrics useful hidden geometry becomes decoder-visible task signal.

Reasoning-trained language models often spend more tokens on harder problems, but longer chains of thought do not show whether a model is merely computing for more steps or following a different internal trajectory. We study this distinction through hidden-state trajectories during chain-of-thought generation across competitive programming, mathematics, and Boolean satisfiability. Raw trajectory geometry is strongly shaped by generation length: longer generations mechanically alter path statistics, so difficulty-dependent comparisons are misleading without adjustment. After residualizing trajectory statistics on length, difficulty remains systematically coupled to corrected trajectory geometry across all domains studied. The clearest reasoning-specific separation appears in the code domain, where harder problems show more direct corrected trajectories and less heterogeneous local curvature in reasoning-trained models than in matched instruction-tuned baselines. Corrected difficulty-geometry coupling is weaker, but still present, in mathematics and Boolean satisfiability. Prompt-stage linear probes do not mirror the code-domain separation, and behavioral annotations show that stronger corrected coupling co-occurs with strategy shifts and uncertainty monitoring. Together, these findings establish length correction as a prerequisite for generation-time trajectory analysis and show that reasoning training can be associated with distinct corrected trajectory geometry, with the strength of the effect depending on the domain.

Reinforcement learning (RL) for large language models (LLMs) is dominated by the cost of rollout generation, which has motivated the use of low-precision rollouts (e.g., FP8) paired with a BF16 trainer to improve throughput and reduce memory pressure. This introduces a rollout-training mismatch that biases the policy gradient and can cause training to collapse outright on reasoning benchmarks. We show that the mismatch is non-stationary and acts as a double-edged sword: early in training it provides a stochastic exploration bonus, exposing the gradient to trajectories the trainer would otherwise under-sample, but the same perturbation transitions into a destabilizing source of bias as the policy concentrates. To solve this, we propose Adaptive Importance Sampling (AIS), a correction framework that adjusts the strength of its intervention on a per-batch basis. AIS combines three real-time diagnostics, namely weight reliability, divergence severity, and variance amplification, into a single mixing coefficient that interpolates between the uncorrected and fully importance-weighted gradients, suppressing the destabilizing component of the mismatch while preserving its exploratory benefit. We integrate AIS into GRPO and evaluate it on the diffusion-based LLaDA-8B-Instruct and the autoregressive Qwen3-8B and Qwen3.5-9B across mathematical reasoning and planning benchmarks. AIS matches the BF16 baseline on most tasks while retaining the 1.5 to 2.76x rollout speedup of FP8.

We introduce and analyze Target-Induced Loss Tilting (TILT) for unsupervised domain adaptation under covariate shift. It is based on a novel objective function that decomposes the source predictor as $f+b$, fits $f+b$ on labeled source data while simultaneously penalizing the auxiliary component $b$ on unlabeled target inputs. The resulting fit $f$ is deployed as the final target predictor. At the population level, we show that this target-side penalty implicitly induces relative importance weighting at the population level, but in terms of an estimand $b^*_f$ that is self-localized to the current error, and remains uniformly bounded for any source-target pair (even those with disjoint supports). We prove a general finite-sample oracle inequality on the excess risk, and use it to give an end-to-end guarantee for training with sparse ReLU networks. Experiments on controlled regression problems and shifted CIFAR-100 distillation show that TILT improves target-domain performance over source-only training, exact importance weighting, and relative density-ratio baselines, with a stable dependence on the regularization parameter.

High-fidelity (HF) data are often expensive to collect and therefore scarce, making conditional quantiles difficult to estimate accurately. We propose a two-stage, model-agnostic method for multi-fidelity quantile regression. The central idea is a local quantile link: at each covariate value, the HF quantile is represented as a low-fidelity (LF) quantile evaluated at a covariate-dependent level. This reformulation reduces the problem to estimating the level function, which can be smoother than the HF quantile itself when the LF and HF conditional distributions have similar shapes. We also study the complementary regime in which this advantage weakens and introduce a correction step to improve robustness. Our theory characterizes when the proposed estimator converges faster than direct quantile regression using HF data alone and when the correction step provides further improvement. Experiments on synthetic and real data show that our method yields more accurate quantile estimates and tighter conformal prediction intervals.