Modern state-space models (SSMs) often utilize structured transition matrices which enable efficient computation but pose restrictions on the model's expressivity, as measured in terms of the ability to emulate finite-state automata (FSA). While unstructured transition matrices are optimal in terms of expressivity, they come at a prohibitively high compute and memory cost, even for moderate state sizes. We propose a structured sparse parametrization of transition matrices in SSMs that enables FSA state tracking with provably optimal state size and depth, while keeping the computational cost of the recurrence comparable to that of diagonal SSMs.

Equivariant neural networks provide a principled framework for incorporating symmetry into learning architectures and have been extensively analyzed through the lens of their separation power, that is, the ability to distinguish inputs modulo symmetry. This notion plays a central role in settings such as graph learning, where it is often formalized via the Weisfeiler-Leman hierarchy. In contrast, the universality of equivariant models--their capacity to approximate target functions--remains comparatively underexplored. In this work, we investigate the approximation power of equivariant neural networks beyond separation constraints. We show that separation power does not fully capture expressivity: models with identical separation power may differ in their approximation ability. To demonstrate this, we characterize the universality classes of shallow invariant networks, providing a general framework for understanding which functions these architectures can approximate. Since equivariant models reduce to invariant ones under projection, this analysis yields sufficient conditions under which shallow equivariant networks fail to be universal. Conversely, we identify settings where shallow models do achieve separation-constrained universality. These positive results, however, depend critically on structural properties of the symmetry group, such as the existence of adequate normal subgroups, which may not hold in important cases like permutation symmetry.

Equivariant neural networks have proven to be effective for tasks with known underlying symmetries. However, optimizing equivariant networks can be tricky and best training practices are less established than for standard networks. In particular, recent works have found small training benefits from relaxing equivariance constraints. This raises the question: do equivariance constraints introduce fundamental obstacles to optimization? Or do they simply require different hyperparameter tuning?

Deepfake detection models face two critical challenges: generalization to unseen manipulations and demographic fairness among population groups. However, existing approaches often demonstrate that these two objectives are inherently conflicting, revealing a trade-off between them. In this paper, we, for the first time, uncover and formally define a causal relationship between fairness and generalization. Building on the back-door adjustment, we show that controlling for confounders (data distribution and model capacity) enables improved generalization via fairness interventions. Motivated by this insight, we propose Demographic Attribute-insensitive Intervention Detection (DAID), a plug-and-play framework composed of: i) Demographic-aware data rebalancing, which employs inversepropensity weighting and subgroup-wise feature normalization to neutralize distributional biases; and ii) Demographic-agnostic feature aggregation, which uses a novel alignment loss to suppress sensitive-attribute signals. Across three crossdomain benchmarks, DAID consistently achieves superior performance in both fairness and generalization compared to several state-of-the-art detectors, validating both its theoretical foundation and practical effectiveness.

We study whether and how the choice of optimization algorithm can impact group fairness in deep neural networks. Through stochastic differential equation analysis of optimization dynamics in an analytically tractable setup, we demonstrate that the choice of optimization algorithm indeed influences fairness outcomes, particularly under severe imbalance. Furthermore, we show that when comparing two categories of optimizers, adaptive methods and stochastic methods, RMSProp (from the adaptive category) has a higher likelihood of converging to fairer minima than SGD (from the stochastic category). Building on this insight, we derive two new theoretical guarantees showing that, under appropriate conditions, RMSProp exhibits fairer parameter updates and improved fairness in a single optimization step compared to SGD.

Selecting a compact subset of visual instruction-following data has emerged as an effective way to align large multimodal models with human intentions while avoiding the high cost of full-dataset training. Yet we observe that both full-data training and existing state-of-the-art data selection methods tend to inherit underlying dataset biases such as position bias and spurious correlations, leading to biased model behaviors. To address this issue, we introduce ARDS, a robustness-aware targeted visual instruction-selection framework that explicitly mitigates these weaknesses, sidestepping the need for access to downstream data or time-consuming gradient computation. Specifically, we first identify the worst-case evaluation subgroups through visual and textual task-specific perturbations. The robust training mixture is then constructed by prioritizing samples that are semantically closer to these subgroups in a rich multimodal embedding space. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ARDS substantially boosts both robustness and data efficiency for visual instruction tuning. We also showcase that the robust mixtures produced with a smaller model transfer effectively to larger architectures. Our code and selected datasets that have been demonstrated transferable across models are available at https://github.com/xyang583/ARDS.

Disaggregated evaluation across subgroups is critical for assessing the fairness of machine learning models, but its uncritical use can mislead practitioners. We show that equal performance across subgroups is an unreliable measure of fairness when data are representative of the relevant populations but reflective of real-world disparities. Furthermore, when data are not representative due to selection bias, both disaggregated evaluation and alternative approaches based on conditional independence testing may be invalid without explicit assumptions regarding the bias mechanism. We use causal graphical models to characterize fairness properties and metric stability across subgroups under different data generating processes. Our framework suggests complementing disaggregated evaluations with explicit causal assumptions and analysis to control for confounding and distribution shift, including conditional independence testing and weighted performance estimation. These findings have broad implications for how practitioners design and interpret model assessments given the ubiquity of disaggregated evaluation.

Microsimulation models used by ministries of finance and central banks rely on parametric processes for lifetime earnings that capture only first and second moments of the conditional distribution and miss long-range nonlinear structure. We propose SAGA, a decoder-only transformer for irregular tabular panel sequences, paired with a split conformal calibration wrapper that delivers individual-level prediction intervals with finite-sample marginal coverage guarantees. Trained on the longitudinal Swedish LISA register over 1990 to 2022, comprising 2,143,817 individuals and 61,284,903 person-years, the model forecasts annual labor earnings at horizons of one to thirty years and aggregates them by Monte Carlo into present-discounted lifetime earnings distributions. Against the canonical Guvenen, Karahan, Ozkan, and Song parametric process and tabular and recurrent baselines, SAGA reduces continuous ranked probability score by 31.9 percent at the ten-year horizon and mean absolute error by 37.7 percent at the twenty-year horizon. Conformal intervals achieve nominal coverage to within 0.4 percentage points marginally and within 2.4 percentage points on the worst-case demographic subgroup. The reconstructed lifetime earnings Gini coefficient is 0.327 against the partially observed truth of 0.341 and the GKOS estimate of 0.378. Model weights, calibration tables, and a synthetic equivalent dataset are released for replication outside the protected SCB MONA environment.

Physical activity (PA) plays an important role in maintaining and improving health. Daily steps have been a key PA measure that is easily accessible with common wearable devices. However, methods are lacking to recommend a personalized optimal distribution of daily steps over a period of time for the best of certain health biomarkers. In this paper, we fill this void based on the data from the All of Us Research Program which includes months of step counts as well as repeated measurements of key health biomarkers. We develop a new offline reinforcement learning (RL) algorithm to learn personalized and optimal PA distributions associated with cardiometabolic risk, where the action is a function representing the daily step distribution over a period of time. Simulation studies demonstrate the advantage of the proposed approach over existing continuous-action RL methods. The learned optimal policy from the All of Us data generally suggests people take more daily steps and also follow a more consistent pattern of PA over time while offering tailored recommendations for subgroups in blood glucose level, body mass index, blood pressure, age, and sex.

Subgroup analyses within randomized controlled trials are often underpowered due to limited sample sizes. We address this challenge by leveraging trial participants outside the subgroup of interest to augment estimation within the subgroup. Specifically, we study two Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimators (TMLEs) that borrow information from non-subgroup participants within the same trial: a TMLE with pooled regression (TMLE-PR) and an Adaptive Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimator (A-TMLE). Both estimators enable information sharing without relying on any external real-world data, thereby capitalizing on key strengths of the trial: most importantly, the protection against bias afforded by the randomized treatment, but also harmonized data collection, and consistent treatment and outcome definitions. The general strategy proposed here directly advances the priorities of key regulatory agencies, including the FDA, by improving the precision of subgroup-specific treatment effect estimates without introducing external sources of bias, thereby facilitating rigorous inference to support equitable labeling, access, and post-market evaluation. In a case study based on analysis of data from a cardiovascular outcome trial (LEADER, NCT01179048), we estimate the risk reduction of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) under liraglutide treatment among Black and Asian subgroups -- each comprising less than 10\% of the trial population -- using the proposed estimators that borrow information from the remainder of the trial. Using A-TMLE, in particular, we find estimated absolute MACE risk reductions of 1.6, 1.5, and 1.5 percentage points among Asian participants and 2.1, 2.0, and 2.1 percentage points among Black participants at 365, 540, and 730 days, respectively, with 95\% confidence intervals excluding the null at each time point.