Recent advances in artificial intelligence have enabled the generation of large-scale, low-cost predictions with increasingly high fidelity. As a result, the primary challenge in statistical inference has shifted from data scarcity to data reliability. Prediction-powered inference methods seek to exploit such predictions to improve efficiency when labeled data are limited. However, existing approaches implicitly adopt a use-all philosophy, under which incorporating more predictions is presumed to improve inference. When prediction quality is heterogeneous, this assumption can fail, and indiscriminate use of unlabeled data may dilute informative signals and degrade inferential accuracy. In this paper, we propose Filtered Prediction-Powered Inference (FPPI), a framework that selectively incorporates predictions by identifying a data-adaptive filtered region in which predictions are informative for inference. We show that this region can be consistently estimated under a margin condition, achieving fast rates of convergence. By restricting the prediction-powered correction to the estimated filtered region, FPPI adaptively mitigates the impact of biased or noisy predictions. We establish that FPPI attains strictly improved asymptotic efficiency compared with existing prediction-powered inference methods. Numerical studies and a real-data application to large language model evaluation demonstrate that FPPI substantially reduces reliance on expensive labels by selectively leveraging reliable predictions, yielding accurate inference even in the presence of heterogeneous prediction quality.

When multi-armed bandit (MAB) algorithms allocate pulls among competing arms, the resulting allocation can exhibit huge variation. This is particularly harmful in modern applications such as learning-enhanced platform operations and post-bandit statistical inference. Thus motivated, we introduce a new performance metric of MAB algorithms termed allocation variability, which is the largest (over arms) standard deviation of an arm's number of pulls. We establish a fundamental trade-off between allocation variability and regret, the canonical performance metric of reward maximization. In particular, for any algorithm, the worst-case regret $R_T$ and worst-case allocation variability $S_T$ must satisfy $R_T \cdot S_T=Ω(T^{\frac{3}{2}})$ as $T\rightarrow\infty$, as long as $R_T=o(T)$. This indicates that any minimax regret-optimal algorithm must incur worst-case allocation variability $Θ(T)$, the largest possible scale; while any algorithm with sublinear worst-case regret must necessarily incur ${S}_T= ω(\sqrt{T})$. We further show that this lower bound is essentially tight, and that any point on the Pareto frontier $R_T \cdot S_T=\tildeΘ(T^{3/2})$ can be achieved by a simple tunable algorithm UCB-f, a generalization of the classic UCB1. Finally, we discuss implications for platform operations and for statistical inference, when bandit algorithms are used. As a byproduct of our result, we resolve an open question of Praharaj and Khamaru (2025).

Choosing relevant predictors is central to the analysis of biomedical time-to-event data. Classical frequentist inference, however, presumes that the set of covariates is fixed in advance and does not account for data-driven variable selection. As a consequence, naive post-selection inference may be biased and misleading. In right-censored survival settings, these issues may be further exacerbated by the additional uncertainty induced by censoring. We investigate several inference procedures applied after variable selection for the coefficients of the Lasso and its extension, the adaptive Lasso, in the context of the Cox model. The methods considered include sample splitting, exact post-selection inference, and the debiased Lasso. Their performance is examined in a neutral simulation study reflecting realistic covariate structures and censoring rates commonly encountered in biomedical applications. To complement the simulation results, we illustrate the practical behavior of these procedures in an applied example using a publicly available survival dataset.

Explainable boosting machines (EBMs) are popular "glass-box" models that learn a set of univariate functions using boosting trees. These achieve explainability through visualizations of each feature's effect. However, unlike linear model coefficients, uncertainty quantification for the learned univariate functions requires computationally intensive bootstrapping, making it hard to know which features truly matter. We provide an alternative using recent advances in statistical inference for gradient boosting, deriving methods for statistical inference as well as end-to-end theoretical guarantees. Using a moving average instead of a sum of trees (Boulevard regularization) allows the boosting process to converge to a feature-wise kernel ridge regression. This produces asymptotically normal predictions that achieve the minimax-optimal mean squared error for fitting Lipschitz GAMs with $p$ features at rate $O(pn^{-2/3})$, successfully avoiding the curse of dimensionality. We then construct prediction intervals for the response and confidence intervals for each learned univariate function with a runtime independent of the number of datapoints, enabling further explainability within EBMs.

Large language models (LLMs) such as GPT, Claude, Gemini, and Grok have been deeply integrated into our daily life. They now support a wide range of tasks -- from dialogue and email drafting to assisting with teaching and coding, serving as search engines, and much more. However, their ability to produce highly human-like text raises serious concerns, including the spread of fake news, the generation of misleading governmental reports, and academic misconduct. To address this practical problem, we train a classifier to determine whether a piece of text is authored by an LLM or a human. Our detector is deployed on an online CPU-based platform https://huggingface.co/spaces/stats-powered-ai/StatDetectLLM, and contains three novelties over existing detectors: (i) it does not rely on auxiliary information, such as watermarks or knowledge of the specific LLM used to generate the text; (ii) it more effectively distinguishes between human- and LLM-authored text; and (iii) it enables statistical inference, which is largely absent in the current literature. Empirically, our classifier achieves higher classification accuracy compared to existing detectors, while maintaining type-I error control, high statistical power, and computational efficiency.

Logistic regression remains one of the most widely used tools in applied statistics, machine learning and data science. However, in moderately high-dimensional problems, where the number of features $d$ is a non-negligible fraction of the sample size $n$, the logistic regression maximum likelihood estimator (MLE), and statistical procedures based the large-sample approximation of its distribution, behave poorly. Recently, Sur and Candès (2019) showed that these issues can be corrected by applying a new approximation of the MLE's sampling distribution in this high-dimensional regime. Unfortunately, these corrections are difficult to implement in practice, because they require an estimate of the \emph{signal strength}, which is a function of the underlying parameters $\beta$ of the logistic regression. To address this issue, we propose SLOE, a fast and straightforward approach to estimate the signal strength in logistic regression. The key insight of SLOE is that the Sur and Candès (2019) correction can be reparameterized in terms of the corrupted signal strength, which is only a function of the estimated parameters $\widehat \beta$. We propose an estimator for this quantity, prove that it is consistent in the relevant high-dimensional regime, and show that dimensionality correction using SLOE is accurate in finite samples. Compared to the existing ProbeFrontier heuristic, SLOE is conceptually simpler and orders of magnitude faster, making it suitable for routine use. We demonstrate the importance of routine dimensionality correction in the Heart Disease dataset from the UCI repository, and a genomics application using data from the UK Biobank.

Bandit algorithms are increasingly used in real-world sequential decision-making problems. Associated with this is an increased desire to be able to use the resulting datasets to answer scientific questions like: Did one type of ad lead to more purchases? In which contexts is a mobile health intervention effective? However, classical statistical approaches fail to provide valid confidence intervals when used with data collected with bandit algorithms. Alternative methods have recently been developed for simple models (e.g., comparison of means). Yet there is a lack of general methods for conducting statistical inference using more complex models on data collected with (contextual) bandit algorithms; for example, current methods cannot be used for valid inference on parameters in a logistic regression model for a binary reward. In this work, we develop theory justifying the use of M-estimators---which includes estimators based on empirical risk minimization as well as maximum likelihood---on data collected with adaptive algorithms, including (contextual) bandit algorithms. Specifically, we show that M-estimators, modified with particular adaptive weights, can be used to construct asymptotically valid confidence regions for a variety of inferential targets.

The analysis of non-real-valued data, such as binary time series, has attracted great interest in recent years. This manuscript proposes a post-selection estimator for estimating the coefficient matrices of a high-dimensional generalized binary vector autoregressive process and establishes a Gaussian approximation theorem for the proposed estimator. Furthermore, it introduces a second-order wild bootstrap algorithm to enable statistical inference on the coefficient matrices. Numerical studies and empirical applications demonstrate the good finite-sample performance of the proposed method.