The success of deep learning models in classification and regression is widely attributed to the low-dimensional structure that real-world data tend to exhibit, despite their high-dimensional representation. This work attempts to provide a mathematical framework for binary classification on low-dimensional data, building on Cover's (1965) function-counting theory. With our framework, we aim to address the question of how the low-dimensional structure of the data affects the classification capabilities of learning models. Cover's theory relies on a general position assumption that blinds it to the underlying data structure. We refine this assumption to account for the low-dimensionality of the data and derive dichotomy counts that reflect the data structure. We further extend Cover's separation capacity and problem of generalization to the low-dimensional setting, enabling the impact of the underlying data structure on both to be analyzed.

A central challenge in statistical modeling is identifying the subset of features that belong in the true regression model. The classical best subset selection problem, recently made tractable via mixed-integer optimization (MIO), finds the globally optimal sparse solution. It does not, however, make use of any information beyond the observed data. In many applied settings, domain experts can meaningfully rank or score the relevance of candidate predictors, yet no existing framework integrates such probabilistic expert assessments directly into the best-subsets objective. This paper presents Expert-Implied Bayesian Best Subsets (EBBS), a method that incorporates domain-expert probability estimates of feature relevance into the MIO best-subsets problem through a maximum a posteriori (MAP) framework. Expert views from multiple respondents are aggregated into a single prior probability per feature using the Poisson binomial distribution for marginal probability estimates, the pairwise win rate for pairwise comparisons, or the normalized mean rank for ordinal rankings. This probability enters the objective function as a log-odds penalty term that smoothly encourages or discourages the selection of each feature consistent with the expert consensus. This paper provides analytic derivations of the MAP formulation and characterizes its theoretical properties. The proposed model reduces to Best Subsets when experts all have no views. Empirical results on synthetic and real datasets are forthcoming.

Gradient boosting in the form of decision tree ensembles has successfully been applied to a variety of problems using simple objective functions based on log-likelihoods of a single variable. The concept extends naturally to objective functions operating on vectors - for example, multinomial logistic log-likelihood for multi-class classification, where observations have a score for each class - but popular frameworks approach these functions by either updating one value of the input vectors at a time, or by using a diagonal upper bound on the second derivative. This work extends the usual gradient boosting framework to functions of vector inputs and sketches a simple algorithm that can be used efficiently with histogram-based decision trees.

We generalize the universal approximation theorem for functional input neural networks (FNN) to differentiable maps by including the approximation of the derivatives. A FNN maps the input from a possibly infinite-dimensional weighted manifold to the real-valued hidden layer, on which a non-linear scalar activation function is applied, and then returns the output into a Banach space via some linear readouts. By proving a weighted Nachbin theorem, we establish a universal approximation theorem for differentiable maps, which goes beyond the usual formulation on compact sets and also includes the approximation of the derivatives. This leads us to approximation results for non-anticipative functionals including the horizontal and vertical derivatives. As a further application, we show that linear functions of the signature are able to approximate path space functionals including their directional derivatives.

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.

Benchmarks for out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization frequently show a strong positive correlation between in-distribution (ID) and OOD accuracy across models, termed "accuracy-on-the-line." This pattern is often taken to imply that spurious correlations--correlations that improve ID but reduce OOD performance--are rare in practice. We find that this positive correlation is often an artifact of aggregating heterogeneous OOD examples. Using a simple gradient-based method, OODSelect, we identify semantically coherent OOD subsets where accuracy on the line does not hold. Across widely used distribution shift benchmarks, the OODSelect uncovers subsets, sometimes up to over half of the standard OOD set, where higher ID accuracy predicts lower OOD accuracy. Our findings indicate that aggregate metrics can obscure important failure modes of OOD robustness. We release code and the identified subsets to facilitate further research.

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.

For Large Language Models (LLMs) to be reliably deployed in both everyday and high-stakes domains, knowing when not to answer is equally critical as answering correctly. Real-world user queries, which can be underspecified, ill-posed, or fundamentally unanswerable, require LLMs to reason about uncertainty and selectively abstain--i.e., refuse to answer definitively. However, abstention remains understudied, without a systematic evaluation framework for modern LLMs. In this work, we introduce AbstentionBench: a large-scale benchmark for holistically evaluating abstention across 20 diverse datasets, including questions with unknown answers, underspecification, false premises, subjective interpretations, and outdated information. Evaluating 20 frontier LLMs reveals abstention is an unsolved problem, and one where scaling models is of little use. While recent reasoning LLMs have shown impressive results in complex problem solving, surprisingly, we find that reasoning fine-tuning degrades abstention (by 24% on average), even for math and science domains on which reasoning models are explicitly trained. We find that while a carefully crafted system prompt can boost abstention in practice, it does not resolve models' fundamental inability to reason about uncertainty. We release AbstentionBenchto foster research into advancing LLM reliability.2

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) rely heavily on instruction tuning to align vision and language capabilities, yet the computational cost of training on large-scale datasets remains a major bottleneck. Existing data selection methods aim to mitigate this by selecting important and diverse subsets, but they often suffer from two critical drawbacks: high computational overhead from processing the entire dataset and suboptimal data selection due to separate treatment of importance and diversity. We introduce COIDO, a novel dual-objective framework that jointly optimizes data importance and diversity to overcome these challenges. Unlike existing approaches that require costly evaluations across the whole dataset, COIDO employs a lightweight plug-in scorer. This scorer is trained on just a small random subset of data to learn the distribution of the candidate set, drastically reducing computational demands.

Anomaly detection is a crucial task in data mining, focusing on identifying data points that deviate significantly from the main patterns in the data. This paper introduces Anomaly Detection by an Ensemble of Random Pairs of Hyperspheres (ADERH), a new isolation-based technique leveraging two key observations: (i) anomalies are comparatively rare, and (ii) they typically deviate stronger from general patterns than normal data points. Drawing on a δ-separation argument, ADERH constructs an ensemble of multi-scale hyperspheres built upon randomly paired data points to identify anomalies. To address inevitable overlaps between anomalous and normal regions in the feature space, ADERH integrates two complementary concepts: Pitch, which highlights points near hypersphere boundaries, and NDensity, which down-weights hyperspheres centered on sparse (and often anomalous) regions.