The Inference Report

Many operational decisions are sequences of interventions under a cumulative resource limit, such as a maintenance schedule within a crew-hour budget. Choosing among them calls for the outcome and the cumulative cost each would produce, counterfactual quantities identified from observational data. Two strategies with the same expected cost can exceed the budget at very different rates, so constraining the mean does not bound how often an overrun occurs. Prior two-step architectures, recently extended to continuous doses, constrain the mean cost rather than its tail and allocate at a single decision point. Methods that do bound a cost tail take its distribution from a specified model rather than identifying it from data. We present a predict-then-optimize framework. In the prediction step, any estimator returning an outcome value and a cost distribution supplies what the decision rule consumes, so the predictor is interchangeable. In the optimization step, a chance-constrained selection over a finite candidate set bounds the probability that the cumulative cost exceeds the budget. That tail does not decompose across stages, so each strategy is scored whole. Sweeping the tolerated violation probability traces a safety-utility frontier, and distribution-free finite-sample bounds cover violation and outcome shortfall. Four of five environments, spanning clinical treatment and equipment maintenance, supply exact counterfactual ground truth; the fifth carries real outcomes from a digital-health micro-randomized trial. Across them, the rule holds the budget where a point-estimate rule overruns it, at an outcome cost the frontier makes explicit. All code is available at https://github.com/mfriendly/counterfactual-chance-selection

Systems often need to combine two numerical assessments of the same yes/no question. The appropriate formula depends on what the numbers represent and on how the sources are related. Averaging is correct when one of several alternative interpretations applies; multiplying odds is correct when probability reports are based on conditionally independent evidence and a common prior; and probabilities of alternative successful derivations require their dependence or shared evidence to be taken into account. We state the assumptions behind several common combination rules and derive the corresponding combined probabilities. Two groups of Monte Carlo experiments address different questions. First, controlled generating mechanisms verify that the derived rule recovers the correct probability in the situations for which its assumptions hold. Second, the same mechanisms measure the consequences of using a mismatched rule, using logarithmic score and threshold decisions with different costs. Distinct pooling rules can produce the same binary decision at threshold 1/2 while assigning substantially different probabilities, so binary accuracy alone can conceal important differences. We also give probabilistic interpretations of conflicting-evidence rules and show that, for overlapping derivations, retaining the identities of shared uncertain premises permits direct calculation of the probability that at least one derivation is available. Pairwise combination of proof probabilities loses information when there are three or more derivations.

Whether an additional general dimension is necessary beyond correlated first-order factors is a property of the population covariance matrix, not of any estimator or design. This research establishes when that property can be decided. Where the general and group loadings are proportional within every cluster the bifactor structure is covariance-equivalent to correlated factors, so no sample size separates them (Proposition 1); where that proportionality fails in every cluster, three items per cluster and some mild regularities leave no $K$-factor model with diagonal uniquenesses able to reproduce the covariance matrix (Theorem 1); and between them lies a mixed boundary, located numerically here and turning on cluster resistance. Distinguishability is therefore graded, measured by the population distance to the $K$-factor class. Because that question is conditional on a first-order structure which is itself uncertain, a two-step procedure is developed within partially exploratory factor analysis, delivering a structure only when it reproduces across adjacent counts and treating non-delivery as legitimate. Simulation shows that a unanimous count can accompany a structure that fails to reproduce, and that absorbed local dependence can imitate a general factor, the error growing with sample size while stability indicators stay clean. Four empirical datasets illustrate the possible outcomes.

Structured potential outcomes such as microscopy images may be recorded after an unknown, unit-specific transformation. If that transformation can depend on treatment, covariates or the intrinsic outcome, raw-coordinate analyses may mix biological effects with acquisition geometry. We study the unrestricted observation model X = Γ . Y(A) and characterize its observable information: a target is uniformly recoverable exactly when it is constant on group orbits, while a Borel maximal invariant retains every measurable invariant target. We then distinguish observability from statistical losslessness. A quotient-faithful reconstruction theorem shows that quotient reduction is sufficient for the full transformed experiment exactly when the conditional law of the raw observation given treatment, covariates and the quotient has a parameter-free version. Conditional Haar contamination on a compact group yields Blackwell equivalence as a special case; it is not imposed in the main model. We also separate independent site-specific product actions from shared diagonal actions and show why componentwise canonicalization can discard relative cross-site information. Under explicit metric and kernel regularity, an approximate-contamination theorem bounds quotient-law Wasserstein error and the induced perturbation of population maximum mean discrepancy. For finite-support multichannel lattice images, we construct a maximal invariant under integer translations and quarter turns, combine its characteristic Gaussian kernel with a complete paired-swap test, and retain the original simulations and RxRx1 HUVEC study. Under the sharp null, the quotient test rejected in 0.052 of simulation replicates; at unit effect strength its power was 0.992. The primary RxRx1 contrast had an enumerated paired-swap p-value of 0.0078.

Ranking data arise in scientific and machine learning applications, including recommendation systems, information retrieval, voting, marketing, and AI preference ranking from human feedback. Existing statistical work has primarily focused on inference tasks such as preference estimation, rank aggregation, and ranking prediction. However, generating realistic synthetic rankings from an observed population is important for privacy-preserving data sharing, benchmark construction, simulation, and uncertainty quantification. This task is challenging because rankings are high-dimensional combinatorial objects with non-Euclidean dependence structures, while ranking populations often exhibit substantial preference heterogeneity. We propose a framework for population-level generative modeling through a latent preference simplex embedding. It estimates a low-dimensional latent preference simplex through a likelihood-based ranking model, leverages flow matching to learn the population distribution of latent preferences, and generates new rankings through the fitted probabilistic ranking model. We show that ranking generation admits an oracle reduction to latent distribution learning and derive finite-sample generative guarantees that clarify how the number of items, ranking length, and latent dimension affect accuracy. Experiments on synthetic and real datasets demonstrate improved population-level fidelity and provide a statistically interpretable representation of preference heterogeneity.

This paper develops procedures for nonparametric goodness-of-fit testing under covariate shift, where labelled data are drawn from a source population but goodness-of-fit is evaluated for a target population. The distribution mismatch is quantified by either a bounded moment condition or a sub-exponential tail condition on the target-to-source density ratio. Our method combines truncated importance-weighting kernel ridge regression with a multiplier bootstrap to construct confidence sets for the regression function. The truncation stabilizes the importance- weighting kernel ridge regression as well as the bootstrap calibration, making our approach applicable even when the density ratio has heavy tails. We prove nonasymptotic validity and sharpness of the resulting confidence sets under suitable operator compatibility conditions, and establish explicit error rates for coverage probability under specific conditions on the target- to-source density ratio and on the spectral decay of the kernel integral operator. Numerical experiments corroborate our theoretical findings.