Benchmarks of machine learning models often include many datasets, making evaluation expensive. For efficiency, it is preferable to perform evaluations on small, representative datasets instead. The selection of such subsets typically relies on heuristics and is rarely analyzed for the robustness of the resulting model rankings. We introduce a framework to perform the task of selecting datasets subsets with an evaluation of how different selection strategies preserve the global model rankings. Our framework includes bootstrap aggregation, which provides valid confidence intervals, allowing a principled comparison of selection strategies. We consider clustering, design criteria (A/D-optimality), random baselines, and greedy farthest-first (FAFI). For the latter, we derive upper bounds on selection quality in terms of ranking errors as a function of the number of selected datasets. Empirically, in time series classification (TSC, 112 datasets) and in a supplementary natural language processing benchmark derived from MTEB (57 tasks), several selection strategies improve rank preservation compared with random subsets, including simple FAFI. In contrast, in recommender systems (30 datasets), the improvement of strategies over random selection is small and typically statistically insignificant. For TSC, our best-performing strategy achieves a Spearman correlation of 0.95 with the full benchmark model rankings using only five selected datasets. Additional experiments indicate that the effectiveness of selection approaches depends on both the quality of dataset representations and the scale of the benchmarking regime.

Data attribution methods aim to answer useful counterfactual questions like "what would a ML model's prediction be if it were trained on a different dataset?" However, estimation of data attribution models through techniques like empirical influence or "datamodeling" remains very computationally expensive. This causes a critical trust issue: if only a few computationally rich parties can obtain data attributions, how can resource-constrained parties trust that the provided attributions are indeed "good," especially when they are used for important downstream applications (e.g., data pricing)? In this paper, we address this trust issue by proposing an interactive verification paradigm for data attribution. An untrusted and computationally powerful Prover learns data attributions, and then engages in an interactive proof with a resource-constrained Verifier.

Monitoring AIs at runtime can help us detect and stop harmful actions. In this paper, we study how to efficiently combine multiple runtime monitors into a single monitoring protocol. The protocol's objective is to maximize the probability of applying a safety intervention on misaligned outputs (i.e., maximize recall). Since running monitors and applying safety interventions are costly, the protocol also needs to adhere to an average-case budget constraint. Taking the monitors' performance and cost as given, we develop an algorithm to find the best protocol. The algorithm exhaustively searches over when and which monitors to call, and allocates safety interventions based on the Neyman-Pearson lemma. By focusing on likelihood ratios and strategically trading off spending on monitors against spending on interventions, we more than double our recall rate compared to a naive baseline in a code review setting. We also show that combining two monitors can Pareto dominate using either monitor alone. Our framework provides a principled methodology for combining existing monitors to detect undesirable behavior in cost-sensitive settings.

Diffusion models are increasingly deployed in real-world text-to-image services. These models, however, encode implicit assumptions about the world based on webscraped image-caption pairs used during training. Over time, such assumptions may become outdated, incorrect, or socially biased-leading to failures where the generated images misalign with users' expectations or evolving societal norms. Identifying and fixing such failures is challenging and, thus, a valuable asset for service providers, as failures often emerge post-deployment and demand specialized expertise and resources to resolve them. In this work, we introduce SURE, the first end-to-end framework that SecUrely REpairs failures flagged by users of diffusionbased services. SURE enables the service provider to securely collaborate with an external third-party specialized in model repairing (i.e., Model Repair Institute) without compromising the confidentiality of user feedback, the service provider's proprietary model, or the Model Repair Institute's proprietary repairing knowledge. To achieve the best possible efficiency, we propose a co-design of a model editing algorithm with a customized two-party cryptographic protocol. Our experiments show that SURE is highly practical: SURE securely and effectively repairs all 32 layers of Stable Diffusion v1.4 in under 17 seconds (four orders of magnitude more efficient than a general baseline). Our results demonstrate that practical, secure model repair is attainable for large-scale, modern diffusion services.

Multimodal Sentiment Analysis (MSA) aims to infer human emotions by integrating complementary signals from diverse modalities. However, in real-world scenarios, missing modalities are common due to data corruption, sensor failure, or privacy concerns, which can significantly degrade model performance. To tackle this challenge, we propose Hyper-Modality Enhancement (HME), a novel framework that avoids explicit modality reconstruction by enriching each observed modality with semantically relevant cues retrieved from other samples. This cross-sample enhancement reduces reliance on fully observed data during training, making the method better suited to scenarios with inherently incomplete inputs. In addition, we introduce an uncertainty-aware fusion mechanism that adaptively balances original and enriched representations to improve robustness. Extensive experiments on three public benchmarks show that HME consistently outperforms state-of-the-art methods under various missing modality conditions, demonstrating its practicality in real-world MSA applications.

Data duplication within large-scale corpora often impedes large language models' (LLMs) performance and privacy. In privacy-concerned federated learning scenarios, conventional deduplication methods typically rely on trusted third parties to perform uniform deletion, risking loss of informative samples while introducing privacy vulnerabilities. To address these gaps, we propose Federated ReWeighting (FedRW), the first privacy-preserving framework, to the best of our knowledge, that performs soft deduplication via sample reweighting instead of deletion in federated LLM training, without assuming a trusted third party. At its core, FedRW proposes a secure, frequency-aware reweighting protocol through secure multi-party computation, coupled with a parallel orchestration strategy to ensure efficiency and scalability. During training, FedRW utilizes an adaptive reweighting mechanism with global sample frequencies to adjust individual loss contributions, effectively improving generalization and robustness. Empirical results demonstrate that FedRW outperforms the state-of-the-art method by achieving up to 28.78 speedup in preprocessing and approximately 11.42% improvement in perplexity, while offering enhanced security guarantees. FedRW thus establishes a new paradigm for managing duplication in federated LLM training.

Objective gait assessment in Parkinson's Disease (PD) is limited by the absence of large, diverse, and clinically annotated motion datasets. We introduce CARE-PD, the largest publicly available archive of 3D mesh gait data for PD, and the first multi-site collection spanning 9 cohorts from 8 clinical centers. All recordings (RGB video or motion capture) are converted into anonymized SMPL meshes via a harmonized preprocessing pipeline. CARE-PD supports two key benchmarks: supervised clinical score prediction (estimating Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, UPDRS, gait scores) and unsupervised motion pretext tasks (2D-to-3D keypoint lifting and full-body 3D reconstruction). Clinical prediction is evaluated under four generalization protocols: within-dataset, cross-dataset, leave-one-dataset-out, and multi-dataset in-domain adaptation. To assess clinical relevance, we compare state-of-the-art motion encoders with a traditional gait-feature baseline, finding that encoders consistently outperform handcrafted features. Pretraining on CARE-PD reduces MPJPE (from 60.8 mm to 7.5 mm) and boosts PD severity macro-F1 by 17 percentage points, underscoring the value of clinically curated, diverse training data. CARE-PD and all benchmark code are released for non-commercial research at https://neurips2025.care-pd.ca.

Bayesian Network models are a powerful tool to collaboratively optimize production processes in various manufacturing industries. When interacting, collaborating parties must preserve their business secrets by maintaining the confidentiality of their model structures and parameters. While most realistic industry scenarios involve hybrid settings, handling both discrete and continuous data, current state-ofthe-art methods for collaborative and confidential inference only support discrete data and have high communication costs. In a centralized setting, Junction Trees enable efficient inference even in hybrid scenarios without discretizing continuous variables, but no extension for collaborative and confidential scenarios exists. To address this research gap, we introduce Hybrid CCJT, the first framework for confidential multiparty inference in hybrid domains with semi-honest, non-colluding adversaries, comprising: (i) a method to construct a strongly-rooted Junction Tree across collaborating parties through a novel construct of interface cliques; and, (ii) a protocol for confidential inference built upon multiparty computation primitives comprising a one-time alignment phase and a belief propagation system for combining the inference results across the Junction Tree cliques. Extensive evaluation on nine datasets shows that Hybrid CCJT improves the predictive accuracy of continuous target variables by 32% on average compared to the state-of-the-art, while reducing communication costs by a median 10.4 under purely discrete scenarios.

Distribution shifts between training and test data undermine the reliability of deep neural networks, challenging real-world applications across domains and subpopulations. While distributionally robust optimization (DRO) methods like GroupDRO aim to improve robustness by optimizing worst-case performance over predefined groups, their use of a single global classifier can be restrictive when facing substantial inter-environment variability. We propose Multi-Expert Distributionally Robust Optimization (MEDRO), a novel extension of GroupDRO designed to address such complex shifts. MEDRO employs a shared feature extractor with m environment-specific expert classifier heads, and introduces a min-max objective over all m2 expert-environment pairings, explicitly modeling cross-environment risks. This expanded uncertainty set captures fine-grained distributional variations that a single classifier might overlook. Empirical evaluations on a range of standard distribution shift benchmarks demonstrate that MEDRO often achieves robust predictive performance compared to existing methods. Furthermore, MEDRO offers practical inference strategies, such as ensembling or gating mechanisms, for typical scenarios where environment labels are unavailable at test time. Our findings suggest MEDRO as a promising step toward resilient and generalizable machine learning under real-world distribution shifts.

Scalable oversight, the process by which weaker AI systems supervise stronger ones, has been proposed as a key strategy to control future superintelligent systems. However, it is still unclear how scalable oversight itself scales. To address this gap, we propose a framework that quantifies the probability of successful oversight as a function of the capabilities of the overseer and the system being overseen. Specifically, our framework models oversight as a game between capability-mismatched players; the players have oversight-specific Elo scores that are a piecewise-linear function of their general intelligence, with two plateaus corresponding to task incompetence and task saturation. We validate our framework with a modified version of the game Nim and then apply it to four oversight games: Mafia, Debate, Backdoor Code and Wargames. For each game, we find scaling laws that approximate how domain performance depends on general AI system capability. We then build on our findings in a theoretical study of Nested Scalable Oversight (NSO), a process in which trusted models oversee untrusted stronger models, which then become the trusted models in the next step. We identify conditions under which NSO succeeds and derive numerically (and in some cases analytically) the optimal number of oversight levels to maximize the probability of oversight success. We also apply our theory to our four oversight games, where we find that NSO success rates at a general Elo gap of 400 are 13.5% for Mafia, 51.7% for Debate, 10.0% for Backdoor Code, and 9.4% for Wargames; these rates decline further when overseeing stronger systems.