Recent efforts in neural compression have focused on the rate-distortion-perception (RDP) tradeoff, where the perception constraint ensures the source and reconstruction distributions are close in terms of a statistical divergence. Theoretical work on RDP describes properties of RDP-optimal compressors without providing constructive and low complexity solutions. While classical rate-distortion theory shows that optimal compressors should efficiently pack space, RDP theory additionally shows that infinite randomness shared between the encoder and decoder may be necessary for RDP optimality. In this paper, we propose neural compressors that are low complexity and benefit from high packing efficiency through lattice coding and shared randomness through shared dithering over the lattice cells. For two important settings, namely infinite shared and zero shared randomness, we analyze the RDP tradeoff achieved by our proposed neural compressors and show optimality in both cases. Experimentally, we investigate the roles that these two components of our design, lattice coding and randomness, play in the performance of neural compressors on synthetic and real-world data. We observe that performance improves with more shared randomness and better lattice packing.

Online bipartite matching is a fundamental problem in online optimization, extensively studied both in its integral and fractional forms due to its theoretical significance and practical applications, such as online advertising and resource allocation. Motivated by recent progress in learning-augmented algorithms, we study online bipartite fractional matching when the algorithm is given advice in the form of a suggested matching in each iteration. We develop algorithms for both the vertex-weighted and unweighted variants that provably dominate the naïve "coin flip" strategy of randomly choosing between the advice-following and advice-free algorithms. Moreover, our algorithm for the vertex-weighted setting extends to the AdWords problem under the small bids assumption, yielding a significant improvement over the seminal work of Mahdian, Nazerzadeh, and Saberi (EC 2007, TALG 2012). Complementing our positive results, we establish a hardness bound on the robustness-consistency tradeoff that is attainable by any algorithm.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a predominant technique to align language models (LMs) with human preferences or promote outputs which are deemed to be desirable by a given reward function. Standard RL approaches optimize average reward, while methods explicitly focused on reducing the probability of undesired outputs typically come at a cost to average-case performance. To improve this tradeoff, we introduce RePULSe, a new training method that augments the standard RL loss with an additional loss that uses learned proposals to guide sampling low-reward outputs, and then reduces those outputs' probability. We run experiments demonstrating that RePULSe produces a better tradeoff of expected reward versus the probability of undesired outputs and is more adversarially robust, compared to standard RL alignment approaches and alternatives.

Growing evidence suggests that synaptic weights in the brain follow heavy-tailed distributions, yet most theoretical analyses of recurrent neural networks (RNNs) assume Gaussian connectivity. We systematically study the activity of RNNs with random weights drawn from biologically plausible Lévy alpha-stable distributions. While mean-field theory for the infinite system predicts that the quiescent state is always unstable---implying ubiquitous chaos---our finite-size analysis reveals a sharp transition between quiescent and chaotic dynamics. We theoretically predict the gain at which the finite system transitions from quiescent to chaotic dynamics, and validate it through simulations. Compared to Gaussian networks, finite heavy-tailed RNNs exhibit a broader gain regime near the edge of chaos, namely, a slow transition to chaos. However, this robustness comes with a tradeoff: heavier tails reduce the Lyapunov dimension of the attractor, indicating lower effective dimensionality. Our results reveal a biologically aligned tradeoff between the robustness of dynamics near the edge of chaos and the richness of high-dimensional neural activity. By analytically characterizing the transition point in finite-size networks---where mean-field theory breaks down---we provide a tractable framework for understanding dynamics in realistically sized, heavy-tailed neural circuits.

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) have been proposed as a compromise between white-box and black-box models, aiming to achieve interpretability without sacrificing accuracy. The standard training procedure for CBMs is to predefine a candidate set of human-interpretable concepts, extract their values from the training data, and identify a sparse subset as inputs to a transparent prediction model. However, such approaches are often hampered by the tradeoff between exploring a sufficiently large set of concepts versus controlling the cost of obtaining concept extractions, resulting in a large interpretability-accuracy tradeoff. This work investigates a novel approach that sidesteps these challenges: BC-LLM iteratively searches over a potentially infinite set of concepts within a Bayesian framework, in which Large Language Models (LLMs) serve as both a concept extraction mechanism and prior. Even though LLMs can be miscalibrated and hallucinate, we prove that BC-LLM can provide rigorous statistical inference and uncertainty quantification. Across image, text, and tabular datasets, BC-LLM outperforms interpretable baselines and even black-box models in certain settings, converges more rapidly towards relevant concepts, and is more robust to out-of-distribution samples.

Online bidding is a classic optimization problem, with several applications in online decision-making, the design of interruptible systems, and the analysis of approximation algorithms. In this work, we study online bidding under learning-augmented settings that incorporate stochasticity, in either the prediction oracle or the algorithm itself. In the first part, we study bidding under distributional predictions, and find Pareto-optimal algorithms that offer the best-possible tradeoff between the consistency and the robustness of the algorithm. In the second part, we study the power and limitations of randomized bidding algorithms, by presenting upper and lower bounds on the consistency/robustness tradeoffs. Previous works focused predominantly on oracles that do not leverage stochastic information on the quality of the prediction, and deterministic algorithms.

To learn approximately optimal acting policies for decision problems, modern Actor Critic algorithms rely on deep Neural Networks (DNNs) to parameterize the acting policy and greedification operators to iteratively improve it. The reliance on DNNs suggests an improvement that is gradient based, which is per step much less greedy than the improvement possible by greedier operators such as the greedy update used by Q-learning algorithms. On the other hand, slow and steady changes to the policy can also be beneficial for the stability of the learning process, resulting in a tradeoff between greedification and stability. To address this tradeoff, we propose to extend the standard framework of actor critic algorithms with value-improvement: a second greedification operator applied only when updating the policy's value estimate. In this framework the agent can evaluate non-parameterized policies and perform much greedier updates while maintaining the steady gradient-based improvement to the parameterized acting policy. We prove that this approach converges in the popular analysis scheme of generalized Policy Iteration in the finite-horizon domain. Empirically, incorporating value-improvement into the popular off-policy actor-critic algorithms TD3 and SAC significantly improves or matches performance over their respective baselines, across different environments from the DeepMind continuous control domain, with negligible compute and implementation cost.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents are capable of task execution across various domains by autonomously interacting with environments and refining LLM responses based on feedback. However, existing model serving systems are not optimized for the unique demands of serving agents. Compared to classic model serving, agent serving has different characteristics: predictable request pattern, increasing quality requirement, and unique prompt formatting. We identify a key problem for agent serving: LLM serving systems lack session-awareness. They neither perform effective KV cache management nor precisely select the cheapest yet competent model in each round. This leads to a cost-quality tradeoff, and we identify an opportunity to surpass it in an agent serving system. To this end, we introduce AgServe for AGile AGent SERVing.

Off-policy evaluation (OPE) estimates the value of a target treatment policy (e.g., a recommender system) using data collected by a different logging policy. It enables high-stakes experimentation without live deployment, yet in practice accuracy depends heavily on the logging policy used to collect data for computing the estimate. We study how to design logging policies that minimize OPE error for given target policies. We characterize a fundamental reward-coverage tradeoff: concentrating probability mass on high-reward actions reduces variance but risks missing signal on actions the target policy may take. We propose a unifying framework for logging policy design and derive optimal policies in canonical informational regimes where the target policy and reward distribution are (i) known, (ii) unknown, and (iii) partially known through priors or noisy estimates at logging time. Our results provide actionable guidance for firms choosing among multiple candidate recommendation systems. We demonstrate the importance of treatment selection when gathering data for OPE, and describe theoretically optimal approaches when this is a firm's primary objective. We also distill practical design principles for selecting logging policies when operational constraints prevent implementing the theoretical optimum.

We provide a theoretical analysis of Adam under non-stationary stochastic objectives, separating two regimes: Euclidean tracking under adaptive strong monotonicity of the Adam-preconditioned mean-gradient operator, and high-probability projected stationarity guarantees under general $L$-smooth objectives. In the tracking regime, we derive finite-time expected and high-probability bounds that decompose sharply into four components: initialization, objective drift, a first-moment tracking error governed by $β_1$, and a preconditioner perturbation governed by $β_2$. We characterize the burn-in time to reach Adam's irreducible tracking floor under constant and step-decay schedules. We also prove a high-probability bound on the average projected stationarity gap for Adam under distribution shift. Across both analyses, our bounds reveal a noise--drift tradeoff: in noise-dominated regimes, first-moment averaging and adaptive preconditioning can improve the high-probability error, whereas in drift-dominated regimes, stale first-moment information and preconditioner perturbations can compound the cost of nonstationarity, allowing vanilla SGD to achieve a smaller tracking floor. Our explicit $(β_1,β_2,ε)$-dependent bounds delineate when adaptive step-sizing is beneficial versus harmful, and provide a theoretical mechanism for Adam's empirical instability and stabilization under distribution shift.