Model-based reinforcement learning (MBRL) agents typically learn world models by minimizing predictive loss. However, powerful RL optimizers inevitably exploit minor model inaccuracies, leading to simulator exploitation and a reality gap where policies succeed in simulation but fail in the real world. We propose that the objective for learning simulators should be strategic robustness rather than predictive accuracy, and formulate this as a zero-sum minimax game between a model player and an adversarial policy player. We provide a comprehensive theoretical analysis: (1) an online learning guarantee showing the game is learnable with sublinear regret bounds; (2) a tractable critic-based simplification bounding the global policy-value gap by the local critic's loss; and (3) an Error-MDP duality, proving that finding the worst-case policy is formally dual to a standard RL problem where the reward is the one-step critic error. This duality yields a provably convergent active data selection algorithm. Experiments on continuous control tasks demonstrate that our approach reduces prediction error in strategically important regions by $1.5$-$2.2\times$ and enables policies trained purely in simulation to match near-optimal real-world performance.

Randomly initialized neural networks induce a prior over functions, but the predictor used in practice is produced only after training. We ask how much of this initial bias survives the training pipeline. To make the question measurable, we introduce initialization memory: the dependence of the validation-selected predictor on the scale of the random initialization. We perform controlled CIFAR-10 experiments on ResNets where initialization memory already sharply separates training regimes. Low-learning-rate SGD can interpolate while still remembering its initialization: on ResNet-9 with batch size $b=128$, test accuracy varies by $26.5$ percentage points across initialization scales despite $\ge99.5\%$ training accuracy. This is not undertraining: extending the same low-learning-rate regime to $5{,}000$ epochs leaves the spread essentially unchanged. In contrast, Adam-family methods largely erase the dependence. SGD can also be made to forget when larger learning rates are paired with explicit $L_2$ norm control. We interpret these findings in terms of the time scale of forgetting: gradient-flow-like dynamics can preserve initialization memory, whereas stochastic finite-step effects, explicit norm decay, and adaptive preconditioning erase it on scales governed by the size of explicit or implicit regularization. The practical inductive bias of a trained network is therefore not the architectural prior alone, but the architectural prior after being filtered by the forgetting dynamics of the training pipeline; and the same regularizers that improve generalization are precisely those that erase memory of initialization.

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.

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.

We study the Lipschitz bandit problem, where a learner sequentially maximizes an unknown Lipschitz function $f$ over a domain $\mathcal{X} \subset [0,1]^d$ using noisy pointwise evaluations. Existing regret bounds are either worst-case, scaling as $\tildeΘ \left ( T^{d+1/d+2}\right )$, or adaptive via the zooming dimension $d_z$, yielding $\tildeΘ \left ( T^{d_z+1/d_z+2}\right )$. However, such zooming-based guarantees are only partially instance-dependent, as they depend solely on the asymptotic growth of near-optimal level sets and fail to capture finer structural properties of $f$. We provide an analysis and an algorithm that characterizes the regret through integrals of the suboptimality gap of $f$ over its level sets. This yields regret bounds that adapt to the local growth of level sets, rather than only their asymptotic behavior. As a corollary, when the set of maximizers has dimension $d^\star>0$, we obtain improved adaptive rates of order $\tilde{\mathcal{O}} \left ( T^{d_z+1 / \max(d_z,d^\star)+2}\right )$ strictly improving over classical zooming bounds in this regime. Finally, we extend our analysis to the full-information setting (Lipschitz experts) and show how some of the regularity assumptions can be relaxed.

Sparse recovery in linear systems underpins applications from signal processing to high-dimensional regression. Sparse Bayesian Learning, grounded in the principle of automatic relevance determination (ARD), offers a practical Bayesian mechanism for feature sparsity via marginal likelihood optimization. Yet, its reliance on a homoscedastic noise model renders it sensitive to data contaminations such as outliers or misspecified noise, harming model fit and predictions. Instead, we propose jointly learning individual feature and sample relevancies, enabling simultaneous model and data sparsification via a single Bayesian objective. This symmetric pruning of model and data offers a natural extension that preserves conjugacy, admits closed-form updates for standard optimization procedures, and aligns with perspectives from robust regression and influence functions. Empirical results across diverse regression tasks affirm that a joint ARD approach consistently yields both sparse and robust prediction models.

Reliable probability estimates are critical in many machine learning applications, yet modern classifiers are often poorly calibrated. Post-hoc calibration provides a simple and widely used solution, but the large number of proposed methods, combined with small-scale and inconsistent evaluations, makes it difficult to determine which approaches are truly effective in practice. We introduce a large-scale, standardized benchmark for post-hoc calibration, covering nearly 2000 experiments across tabular and computer vision tasks, including binary, multiclass, and large-scale classification settings. Our benchmark aggregates predictions from a diverse set of classical models, modern deep learning architectures, and foundation models, and provides unified, reproducible implementations of dozens of calibration methods within a common evaluation framework. We argue that Post-Hoc Improvement (PHI) in proper scoring rules offers a principled alternative to traditional calibration error estimators for comparing post-hoc methods, capturing both calibration quality and potential degradation to the model's predictive performance. Using this framework, we conduct the most comprehensive empirical study of post-hoc calibration to date. Our results reveal consistent patterns across domains: smooth calibration functions outperform binning-based approaches, dedicated multiclass methods are essential in high-dimensional settings, and generic machine learning models are not competitive without calibration-specific design. To facilitate future research, we release all data, code, and evaluation tools, providing a plug-and-play benchmark for developing and comparing calibration methods.

Causal-discovery algorithms return a directed graph, yet provide no principled means of distinguishing edge directions identified by the data from those assigned without an identifying assumption. Under the standard Markov and faithfulness conditions, the observational distribution identifies only a Markov equivalence class; orientations within that class are not determined by the joint distribution and cannot be recovered from additional samples alone, but require either a functional restriction or an intervention. We introduce a protocol for observational causal discovery on continuous data that attaches to each candidate edge a discrete impossibility certificate: a RESOLVED code records the identifiability theorem under which the direction was committed, while an IMPOSSIBLE code records the failure mode together with the specific question a domain expert must answer to resolve it. The bivariate cascade is extended with five gated identifiability tiers LSNM, IGCI, Stein, MDL, and PEIT that abstain when their precondition test rejects. Two oracle primitives, the meta-hub query and the node-children query, jointly establish an upper bound of $1+K$ expert interactions sufficient to recover any DAG, where $K$ denotes the number of non-leaf vertices. Under an ideal-oracle assumption, the bound is met exactly on the asia, sachs, child, and alarm benchmarks.

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.

Optimal transport is widely used to learn distributions, enforce distributional constraints, and model uncertainty. In applications, transport losses are often computed from samples through tractable representations, such as one-dimensional sorting formulas or sliced Wasserstein costs, making them practical components in training pipelines. We study parameterized objectives defined by sampled transport costs and prove graphical convergence of their subdifferentials to the subdifferential of the population objective. In particular, this ensures that standard subgradient methods consistently approach stationary points of the population-level problem. We illustrate the results in several settings, including risk-averse optimization, fairness-constrained learning, and sliced Wasserstein problems. Our analysis highlights that smooth parameterizations provide a favorable interface between statistical consistency and optimization. By contrast, transport objectives with nonsmooth costs and models may exhibit unstable derivatives in the large-sample limit.