Predicting the effect of interventions with many possible variations, e.g., therapeutic content that affects mental health outcomes or an earnings call transcript that drives movement in share price, is useful across several domains. However, classical causal estimators tend to assume that all possible interventions are observed, which is infeasible when interventions vary widely, for instance, in the space of all text strings. We adapt a well-known approach of recasting causal inference as a learning problem, to address high-dimensional treatment spaces. Specifically, under standard assumptions like no unobserved confounding, we show that causal error decomposes into a series of moment-balancing errors of increasing order, and design objectives that directly improve causal estimation. We also show how to project the effect of a high-dimensional treatment onto lower-dimensional treatment attributes, which allows a single model to answer several causal questions without additional attribute-specific training. We empirically evaluate our estimators in settings with high-dimensional continuous, discrete, and text treatments, the last of which used a semi-synthetic dataset of Amazon Reviews. Our experiments demonstrate the benefit of higher-order balance error optimization and competitive performance of projected causal estimates with attribute-specific estimators.

We consider learning from labeled data collected across multiple environments, where the data distribution may vary across these environments. This problem is commonly approached from a causal perspective, seeking invariant representations that retain causal factors while discarding spurious ones. However, this framework assumes that the environment has no direct effect on the target. In contrast, we consider settings in which this assumption fails, but still aim to learn representations that support robust prediction on average across previously unseen environments. To this end, we study representations learned by explicitly modeling variation across environments and then marginalizing that variation out. We analyze the resulting representations and characterize when they are preferable to those learned by causal invariant-representation methods. We propose a concrete method based on generalized random-intercept models, a class of predictors in which such marginalization is possible, and study their generalization properties. Empirically, we show that these models outperform invariant-learning methods across a range of challenging settings.

The invariance principle from causality is at the heart of notable approaches such as invariant risk minimization (IRM) that seek to address out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization failures. Despite the promising theory, invariance principle-based approaches fail in common classification tasks, where invariant (causal) features capture all the information about the label. Are these failures due to the methods failing to capture the invariance? Or is the invariance principle itself insufficient? To answer these questions, we revisit the fundamental assumptions in linear regression tasks, where invariance-based approaches were shown to provably generalize OOD. In contrast to the linear regression tasks, we show that for linear classification tasks we need much stronger restrictions on the distribution shifts, or otherwise OOD generalization is impossible. Furthermore, even with appropriate restrictions on distribution shifts in place, we show that the invariance principle alone is insufficient. We prove that a form of the information bottleneck constraint along with invariance helps address key failures when invariant features capture all the information about the label and also retains the existing success when they do not. We propose an approach that incorporates both of these principles and demonstrate its effectiveness in several experiments.

In PU learning, a binary classifier is trained from positive (P) and unlabeled (U) data without negative (N) data. Although N data is missing, it sometimes outperforms PN learning (i.e., ordinary supervised learning). Hitherto, neither theoretical nor experimental analysis has been given to explain this phenomenon. In this paper, we theoretically compare PU (and NU) learning against PN learning based on the upper bounds on estimation errors. We find simple conditions when PU and NU learning are likely to outperform PN learning, and we prove that, in terms of the upper bounds, either PU or NU learning (depending on the class-prior probability and the sizes of P and N data) given infinite U data will improve on PN learning. Our theoretical findings well agree with the experimental results on artificial and benchmark data even when the experimental setup does not match the theoretical assumptions exactly.

Out-of-distribution (OoD) generalization occurs when representation learning encounters a distribution shift. This occurs frequently in practice when training and testing data come from different environments. Covariate shift is a type of distribution shift that occurs only in the input data, while the concept distribution stays invariant. We propose RIA - Regularization for Invariance with Adversarial training, a new method for OoD generalization under convariate shift. Motivated by an analogy to $Q$-learning, it performs an adversarial exploration for counterfactual data environments. These new environments are induced by adversarial label invariant data augmentations that prevent a collapse to an in-distribution trained learner. It works with many existing OoD generalization methods for covariate shift that can be formulated as constrained optimization problems. We develop an alternating gradient descent-ascent algorithm to solve the problem in the context of causally generated graph data, and perform extensive experiments on OoD graph classification for various kinds of synthetic and natural distribution shifts. We demonstrate that our method can achieve high accuracy compared with OoD baselines.

Recently proposed adversarial classification methods have shown promising results for cost sensitive and multivariate losses. In contrast with empirical risk minimization (ERM) methods, which use convex surrogate losses to approximate the desired non-convex target loss function, adversarial methods minimize non-convex losses by treating the properties of the training data as being uncertain and worst case within a minimax game. Despite this difference in formulation, we recast adversarial classification under zero-one loss as an ERM method with a novel prescribed loss function. We demonstrate a number of theoretical and practical advantages over the very closely related hinge loss ERM methods. This establishes adversarial classification under the zero-one loss as a method that fills the long standing gap in multiclass hinge loss classification, simultaneously guaranteeing Fisher consistency and universal consistency, while also providing dual parameter sparsity and high accuracy predictions in practice.

We study trajectory forecasting under squared loss for time series with weak conditional structure, using highly expressive prediction models. Building on the classical characterization of squared-loss risk minimization, we emphasize regimes in which the conditional expectation of future trajectories is effectively degenerate, leading to trivial Bayes-optimal predictors (flat for prices and zero for returns in standard financial settings). In this regime, increased model expressivity does not improve predictive accuracy but instead introduces spurious trajectory fluctuations around the optimal predictor. These fluctuations arise from the reuse of noise and result in increased prediction variance without any reduction in bias. This provides a process-level explanation for the degradation of Transformerbased forecasts on financial time series. We complement these theoretical results with numerical experiments on high-frequency EUR/USD exchange rate data, analyzing the distribution of trajectory-level forecasting errors. The results show that Transformer-based models yield larger errors than a simple linear benchmark on a large majority of forecasting windows, consistent with the variance-driven mechanism identified by the theory.