sample variance
cca79c22037280d066fbd8bc35ac2e72-Supplemental-Datasets_and_Benchmarks.pdf
A.1 Shower shape variables452 We extend the list of shower shape variables described in Sec. Marginals of each point feature by considering the set all the points from all454 the point clouds together.455 Layer Energy Ei. Denotes the total energy deposited in layer i of the shower. Total energy across all layers of the shower. The layer lateral widths can be interpreted as the spread around the center of energy in the lateral462 plane in respective dimensions.
Synthetic Design: An Optimization Approach to Experimental Design with Synthetic Controls
We investigate the optimal design of experimental studies that have pre-treatment outcome data available. The average treatment effect is estimated as the difference between the weighted average outcomes of the treated and control units. A number of commonly used approaches fit this formulation, including the difference-inmeans estimator and a variety of synthetic-control techniques. We propose several methods for choosing the set of treated units in conjunction with the weights. Observing the NP-hardness of the problem, we introduce a mixed-integer programming formulation which selects both the treatment and control sets and unit weightings. We prove that these proposed approaches lead to qualitatively different experimental units being selected for treatment. We use simulations based on publicly available data from the USBureau of Labor Statistics that show improvements in terms of mean squared error and statistical power when compared to simple and commonly used alternatives such as randomized trials.
Adaptive Budget Allocation in LLM-Augmented Surveys
Ye, Zikun, Lyu, Jiameng, Tao, Rui
Large language models (LLMs) can generate survey responses at low cost, but their reliability varies substantially across questions and is unknown before data collection. Deploying LLMs in surveys still requires costly human responses for verification and correction. How should a limited human-labeling budget be allocated across questions in real time? We propose an adaptive allocation algorithm that learns which questions are hardest for the LLM while simultaneously collecting human responses. Each human label serves a dual role: it improves the estimate for that question and reveals how well the LLM predicts human responses on it. The algorithm directs more budget to questions where the LLM is least reliable, without requiring any prior knowledge of question-level LLM accuracy. We prove that the allocation gap relative to the best possible allocation vanishes as the budget grows, and validate the approach on both synthetic data and a real survey dataset with 68 questions and over 2000 respondents. On real survey data, the standard practice of allocating human labels uniformly across questions wastes 10--12% of the budget relative to the optimal; our algorithm reduces this waste to 2--6%, and the advantage grows as questions become more heterogeneous in LLM prediction quality. The algorithm achieves the same estimation quality as traditional uniform sampling with fewer human samples, requires no pilot study, and is backed by formal performance guarantees validated on real survey data. More broadly, the framework applies whenever scarce human oversight must be allocated across tasks where LLM reliability is unknown.