2026-04-17 | | Total: 19
The American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) provides access to a wide range of unit-level survey data consisting of correlated Gaussian and binomial distributed survey responses along with associated survey weights. As such, we propose a Bayesian hierarchical framework for jointly modeling unit-level Gaussian and binomial survey data. The model introduces a shared area-level random effect to capture dependence across responses. Informative sampling is addressed using a pseudo-likelihood construction, and Polya-Gamma data augmentation provides an efficient conjugate Gibbs sampler, enabling scalable inference for large survey datasets. Through empirical simulations based on ACS PUMS data, we show that the joint model achieves notable reductions in mean squared error and improved interval scores compared to univariate and design-based estimators. Applying the method to the 2023 Illinois PUMS data, we find that the joint model yields small-area estimates similar to those from the univariate model and the Horvitz-Thompson estimator, but with smaller posterior variances. The computational cost associated with the joint model is also comparable to that of the univariate binomial model. Combined with the empirical simulation results, these findings demonstrate the practical advantages of the proposed approach.
Cellwise Robust Twoblock (CRTB) is introduced, the first cellwise robust method for simultaneous dimension reduction of multivariate predictor and response blocks, in both a dense and a sparse variable-selecting variant. Classical robust methods protect against casewise outliers by downweighting or removing entire observations, a strategy that becomes inefficient -- and eventually breaks down -- when contamination is scattered across individual cells rather than concentrated in whole rows. CRTB combines a column-wise pre-filter for cellwise outlier detection with model-based imputation of flagged cells inside an iteratively reweighted M-estimation loop, retaining the clean cells of partially contaminated rows instead of discarding the observation. An efficient algorithm is provided that uses the classical twoblock SVD as a warm start and converges in a handful of IRLS iterations at a moderate computational cost. The method resists settings where more than $50\%$ of rows contain contaminated cells while retaining comparable efficiency on clean data. A simulation study confirms these properties and shows that CRTB additionally recovers the underlying cellwise outlier pattern with high fidelity and, in the sparse setting, the correct set of informative variables. Two compelling examples illustrate CRTB's practical utility. In each of these, CRTB is shown to be conducive to results that are highly interpretable in the respective domains in the presence of cellwise outliers. As a by-product, the corresponding cells are identified with high fidelity.
In propensity score weighted analysis, robust variance that does not account for weight estimation is commonly used. In propensity score weighted Cox models (CoxPSW), the robust variance is known to be conservative when weights for the average treatment effect (ATE) are used, but it remains unclear whether this conservativeness also holds for other weighting schemes. This study evaluated the performance of the robust variance in CoxPSW when weights other than ATE are applied. We conducted an asymptotic comparison between the robust variance and a variance estimator that accounts for weight estimation under non-ATE weights. Their performance was further evaluated through simulation studies and real data analysis. The analytical results, simulations, and real data analysis indicated that the robust variance is not necessarily conservative in CoxPSW when weights other than ATE are used. These findings suggest that variance estimators that account for weight estimation should be used when applying non-ATE weights in CoxPSW.
Incorporation of external information into high-dimensional modeling for gene expression data has been shown, both theoretically and empirically, to substantially enhance performance. Such external information, sometimes referred to as prior information or priors, has become increasingly accessible from multiple sources, yet its reliability may vary considerably. Existing approaches often integrate these priors without sufficiently accounting for their quality, which may result in unsatisfactory or even misleading results. To effectively and selectively exploit such priors, we propose adaptive Multi-Prior Lasso, a novel regularization approach that simultaneously identifies reliable prior sources and integrates them to improve model performance. For high-dimensional generalized linear models (GLMs), an adaptive data-driven weight is assigned to each prior, so that more reliable sources are emphasized while less credible ones are downweighted. Theoretical guarantees are established, and the proposed method is shown through extensive simulations to improve estimation, prediction, and variable selection. An application to TCGA breast cancer gene expression data further illustrates the practical value of the proposed method, showing that incorporating prior information from PubMed published studies improves model performance.
Forced-choice conjoint designs have become a staple method in the experimentalist's toolkit. However, the forced-choice outcome is neither always consistent with the types of choices individuals make in real political contexts, nor is it statistically efficient. In this paper, we formalize how ranked outcomes can be integrated into the conjoint framework. We provide a proof that rank-expanded estimators are equivalent to conventional AMCE, a theoretical account of how additional profiles increase the efficiency of conjoint designs, and design-based tests for the transitivity and independence of irrelevant alternatives assumptions that underpin the expansion. Across two pre-registered survey experiments--the first comparing forced-choice and ranked-choice designs across candidate and policy domains, and the second varying the number of ranked profiles--we find that ranked-choice conjoints yield substantively similar but more precise AMCE estimates, shrinking standard errors by 12-13% with one additional profile and up to 55% with six profiles per vignette. Based on efficiency--validity trade-offs, we recommend K = 4 profiles for most applications. We provide an accompanying open-source R package, cjrank, that implements rank expansion, AMCE estimation, efficiency diagnostics, and the assumption tests described in this paper.
The integrated conditional moment (ICM) test is a classical and widely used method for assessing the adequacy of regression models. Although it performs well in fixed-dimension settings, its behavior changes dramatically when the predictor dimension diverges: in such regimes, the limiting null and alternative distributions of the ICM statistic degenerate to fixed constants. Moreover, when the number of predictors diverges, the commonly used wild bootstrap no longer approximates the null distribution of the ICM statistic well, leading to size distortion and substantial power loss. To address these challenges, we propose a new specification test based on weighted residual processes for evaluating the parametric form of the regression mean function in high-dimensional settings where the number of predictors increases with the sample size. We establish the asymptotic properties of the test statistic under the null hypothesis and under global and local alternatives. The proposed test maintains the nominal significance level and can detect local alternatives that deviate from the null hypothesis at the parametric rate $1/\sqrt{n}$. Furthermore, we propose a smooth residual bootstrap to approximate the limiting null distribution and establish its validity in high-dimensional settings. Two simulation studies and a real-data example are conducted to evaluate the finite-sample performance of the proposed test.
Industrial experimentation requires both factor screening to identify critical variables and response optimization to find optimal operating conditions. Traditional approaches treat these as separate phases, necessitating costly sequential experimentation and full experimental redesign between phases. This paper introduces HASOD (Hybrid Adaptive Screening-Optimization Design), a novel three-phase sequential framework that simultaneously addresses factor identification and response surface optimization within a unified adaptive structure. Phase 1 employs a modified Definitive Screening Design with an enhanced Cumulative Weighted Effect Screening Statistic (CWESS) incorporating interaction detection via ElasticNet regression. Phase 2 adaptively selects augmentation strategies -- from full factorial to Response Surface Methodology designs -- based on critical factors identified in Phase 1. Phase 3 applies Gaussian process-based global optimization with uncertainty-guided refinement near the predicted optimum. We prove that CWESS asymptotically separates active from inactive factors, providing classification consistency guarantees absent from most screening methodologies. Across six test scenarios, HASOD achieves 97.08% factor detection accuracy -- 13.75 percentage points above traditional sequential methods (83.33%) -- and significantly outperforms all eight competitor methods (p < 0.001). HASOD yields improved prediction performance (mean error: 3.61) while maintaining >=90% detection across all scenarios including interaction-heavy systems. The framework requires an average of 41.5 experimental runs -- a 43% increase over traditional approaches -- yet delivers superior detection accuracy with dramatically reduced prediction error. HASOD offers a theoretically grounded, unified framework that eliminates sequential redesign without sacrificing predictive capability.
Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) is a standard exploratory tool for microbiome beta-diversity studies, but its axes are defined by pairwise dissimilarities and therefore do not directly identify the taxa driving an ordination. We propose Bayesian sparse principal coordinates analysis (BSPCoA), a post hoc framework that approximates the leading principal coordinates by a sparse linear surrogate in the observed taxa. A delta-tolerance diagnostic quantifies the discrepancy between the classical ordination and its best linear surrogate, clarifying when taxon-level interpretation is well supported. We place three-parameter beta normal global-local priors on the surrogate coefficients to induce row sparsity, obtain posterior uncertainty, and select influential taxa. The method reduces to sparse principal component analysis under Euclidean distance, while remaining applicable to ecologically meaningful dissimilarities such as Bray--Curtis and Hellinger distances. We conduct simulation studies to demonstrate that BSPCoA provides an approximately linear representation of the dominant ordination geometry while enhancing interpretability in sparse microbiome settings. In the Hadza gut microbiome data, the method produces an ordination close to that of classical PCoA while highlighting a parsimonious set of taxa associated with seasonal variation.
This paper proposes a fully Bayesian framework for node-level outlier detection in graph signals, where measurements are observed on the nodes of an underlying graph. Unlike traditional outlier detection methods, our approach accounts for the relational dependencies induced by the graph, identifying outliers that disrupt the underlying smoothness. We model the observed signal as a combination of a graph-smooth component, captured via an intrinsic Gaussian Markov random field (IGMRF) prior, and a sparse outlier component modeled by a spike-and-slab prior. A key advantage of the proposed method is its ability to provide principled uncertainty quantification by estimating the posterior probability that each node is an outlier, rather than enforcing a deterministic binary decision. To facilitate posterior inference, we develop an efficient Gibbs sampling algorithm. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method through simulation studies on various graph structures, as well as a real data analysis of PM2.5 levels in California, exploring their relationship with wildfire occurrences.
Propensity score weighting approaches have been widely implemented in clinical research to estimate the effects of a treatment or exposure while mitigating the risk of confounding in the absence of random assignment. In practice, when working with large electronic health records (EHR) or administrative datasets to evaluate health quality outcomes at the institutional level, or evaluate supportive care interventions for a wide range of hospitalized patients, it may be advisable to stratify the propensity score weighting approach by indication, reason for admission, or other clinical risk factors due to the potential for substantial heterogeneity across subgroups of patients with complex care needs. A stratified approach may be appropriate if (i) prognosis differs substantially between patient subgroups such that achieving balance in the composition of these strata between exposure/treatment groups should be prioritized, (ii) likelihood of exposure differs substantially across clinical subgroups, or (iii) the covariate-exposure associations are expected to differ substantially between subgroups (i.e. there are covariate-subgroup interactions in the exposure/treatment propensity model). For example, we may want to evaluate the impact of prophylactic anticoagulant use for venous thromboembolism prevention in elderly patients admitted to hospital for a wide array of conditions. The purpose of this article is to outline an approach to implementing propensity score weighting with stratification by clinical groups. We also provide guidance on best practices with particular focus on EHR and administrative medical data, and population health settings.
AI tools increasingly guide targeted interventions in healthcare, education, and recruiting. Algorithms score individuals, trigger outreach to those above a threshold (e.g., high-risk or high-value), and encourage them to request service; then providers deliver service to those who request. Standard practice sets the threshold and selects the algorithm to maximize predictive accuracy, assuming that better predictions yield better outcomes. We show that this approach is suboptimal when limited service capacity and probabilistic behavioral responses influence who receives service. In such settings, the optimal score threshold must balance two effects: ensuring all capacity is filled (utilization) and ensuring high-value individuals are served despite competition between requests (cannibalization). We characterize the optimal threshold and prove that policies based solely on predictive accuracy are generally suboptimal. Further, because optimal thresholds vary with service capacity, algorithm selection metrics like AUC, which weight all thresholds equally, are misaligned with operational performance. We introduce a new metric--Operational AUC (OpAUC)--and show it leads to optimal algorithm selection. Finally, we conduct a case study on sepsis early warning data and illustrate the magnitude of improvement that can be achieved from improved threshold and algorithm selection.
Online A/B testing at scale relies on proxy metrics -- short-term, easily-measured signals used in place of slow-moving long-term outcomes. When the proxy-outcome relationship is heterogeneous across user segments, aggregate correlation can mask directional failures akin to Simpson's Paradox, leading to costly ship/no-ship errors. We introduce PROXIMA (Proxy Metric Validation Framework for Online Experiments), a lightweight diagnostic framework that scores proxy reliability through a composite of three complementary dimensions: normalised effect correlation, directional accuracy, and segment-level fragility rate. Unlike surrogate-index approaches that predict long-term treatment effects, PROXIMA directly audits whether a candidate proxy leads to correct launch decisions and flags the user segments where it fails. We validate PROXIMA on two public datasets -- the Criteo Uplift corpus (14M observations, advertising) and KuaiRec (7K users, video recommendation) -- using 80 simulated A/B tests. Early engagement metrics achieve a composite reliability of 0.80 on Criteo and 0.62 on KuaiRec, yielding 98.4% average decision agreement with an oracle policy. Fragility analysis reveals that recommendation domains exhibit substantially higher segment-level heterogeneity (68% fragility) than advertising (13%), yet directional accuracy remains above 96% in both cases. A sensitivity analysis over the weight space confirms that no single component suffices and that the composite provides substantially better discrimination between reliable and unreliable proxies than correlation alone. Code and reproduction scripts are available at: https://github.com/Avinash-Amudala/PROXIMA
Targeted amplicon panels are widely used in oncology diagnostics, but providing per-gene performance guarantees for copy number variant (CNV) detection remains challenging due to amplification artifacts, process-mismatch heterogeneity, and limited validation sample sizes. While Bayesian CNV callers naturally quantify per-sample uncertainty, translating this into the frequentist population-level guarantees required for clinical validation, coverage rates, false-positive bounds, and minimum detectable copy-number changes, is a fundamentally different inferential problem. We show empirically that even robust Bayesian credible intervals, including coarsened posteriors and sandwich-adjusted intervals, are severely miscalibrated on panels with small amplicon counts per gene. To address this, we propose a hybrid framework that evaluates Bayesian posterior functionals on validation samples and models the resulting squared losses with a Gamma distribution, yielding tolerance intervals with valid frequentist coverage. Three components make the method practical under real-world constraints: (1) imputation that removes the influence of true CNV-positive samples without requiring known ground truth, (2) regularization to address small sample variability, and (3) evidence-based stratification on the log model evidence to accommodate non-exchangeable noise profiles arising from process mismatch. Evaluated on two targeted amplicon panels using leave-one-out cross-validation, the proposed method achieves single-digit mean absolute coverage error across all genes under both process-matched and unmatched conditions, whereas Bayesian comparators exhibit mean absolute errors exceeding 60\% on clinically relevant genes such as ERBB2.
In statistics and machine learning, the traditional meaning of the terms `outlier' and `anomaly' is a case in the dataset that behaves differently from the bulk of the data. This raises suspicion that it may belong to a different population. But nowadays increasing attention is being paid to so-called cellwise outliers. These are individual values somewhere in the data matrix (or data tensor). Depending on the dimension, even a relatively small proportion of outlying cells can contaminate over half the cases, which is a problem for existing casewise methods. It turns out that detecting cellwise outliers as well as constructing cellwise robust methods requires techniques that are quite different from the casewise setting. For instance, one has to let go of some intuitive equivariance properties. The problem is difficult, but the past decade has seen substantial progress. For high-dimensional data the cellwise approach is becoming dominant, and typically can deal with missing values as well. We review developments in the estimation of location and covariance matrices as well as regression methods, principal component analysis, methods for tensor data, and various other settings.
``Behind every limit theorem, there is an inequality'' said Kolmogorov. We say ``for every inequality, there is an approximate inequality under approximate regularity conditions.'' Suppose $X, X'$ are independent and identically distributed random variables. Then $X \le X'$ with a probability of at least $1/2$, irrespective of the underlying (common) distribution. One can ask what happens to the probability if $X, X'$ are independent but not identically distributed. It should be approximately $1/2$ if the distributions are approximately equal. Similarly, what if the random variables are dependent? It should, again, be approximately $1/2$ if the random variables are approximately independent. We explore an extension of this probability inequality involving order statistics and develop approximate versions of such an inequality under violations of independence and identical distribution assumptions. We further show that this inequality can be used as a basis to prove asymptotic validity of bootstrap/subsampling, finite-sample validity of conformal prediction, permutation tests, and asymptotic validity of rank tests without group invariance. Specifically, in the context of resampling inference, our results can be seen as a finite-sample instantiation of some results by Peter Hall and yield an alternative ``cheap bootstrap'' that applies to high-dimensional data.
Internal climate variability arises from the climate system's inherently chaotic dynamics. Quantifying it is essential for climate science, as it enables risk-based decision-making and differentiates between externally forced change and internal fluctuations. In statistical terms, natural variability corresponds to aleatoric uncertainty, i.e., irreducible stochastic variability. Despite this close conceptual alignment, the link between internal climate variability and aleatoric uncertainty has not yet been formalized. We establish a theoretical link by showing that member-to-member differences in single-model large ensembles provide a direct representation of aleatoric uncertainty. To quantify the spatio-temporal structure of aleatoric uncertainty, we employ generalized additive models. The proposed framework is validated through comparison with ERA5-Land reanalysis data, demonstrating that ensemble-derived estimates reproduce key spatial and temporal patterns of real-world variability. Applied to the water balance over the Iberian Peninsula, our approach reveals coherent variability structures and pronounced regional heterogeneity. We find a decline in variability in drought-prone regions and seasons, a pattern that strengthens under +3 °C global warming, implying an increased risk of persistent summer drought conditions. Beyond this application, the framework is climate-model agnostic and transferable to other variables and spatial scales, providing a statistical basis for quantifying internal climate variability as aleatoric uncertainty.
Data-driven operations management often relies on parameters estimated from costly human-generated labels. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) and other AI systems offer inexpensive auxiliary data, but introduce a new challenge: AI outputs are not direct observations of the target outcomes, but could involve high-dimensional representations with complex and unknown relationships to human labels. Conventional methods leverage AI predictions as direct proxies for true labels, which can be inefficient or unreliable when this relationship is weak or misspecified. We propose Generative Augmented Inference (GAI), a general framework that incorporates AI-generated outputs as informative features for estimating models of human-labeled outcomes. GAI uses an orthogonal moment construction that enables consistent estimation and valid inference with flexible, nonparametric relationship between LLM-generated outputs and human labels. We establish asymptotic normality and show a "safe default" property: relative to human-data-only estimators, GAI weakly improves estimation efficiency under arbitrary auxiliary signals and yields strict gains whenever the auxiliary information is predictive. Empirically, GAI outperforms benchmarks across diverse settings. In conjoint analysis with weak auxiliary signals, GAI reduces estimation error by about 50% and lowers human labeling requirements by over 75%. In retail pricing, where all methods access the same auxiliary inputs, GAI consistently outperforms alternative estimators, highlighting the value of its construction rather than differences in information. In health insurance choice, it cuts labeling requirements by over 90% while maintaining decision accuracy. Across applications, GAI improves confidence interval coverage without inflating width. Overall, GAI provides a principled and scalable approach to integrating AI-generated information.
Tweedie's formula is a cornerstone of measurement-error analysis and empirical Bayes. In the Gaussian location model, it recovers posterior means directly from the observed marginal density, bypassing nonparametric deconvolution. Beyond a few classical examples, however, there is no systematic method for determining when such representations exist or how to derive them. This paper develops a general framework for such identities in additive-noise models. I study when posterior functionals admit direct expressions in terms of the observed density -- identities I call \emph{Tweedie representations} -- and show that they are characterized by a linear map, the \emph{Tweedie functional}. Under general conditions, I establish its existence, uniqueness, and continuity. I further show that, in many applications, the Tweedie functional can be expressed as the inverse Fourier transform of an explicit tempered distribution, suitably extended when necessary. This reframes the search for Tweedie-type formulas as a problem in the calculus of tempered distributions. The framework recovers the classical Gaussian case and extends to a broad family of noise distributions for which such representations were previously unavailable. It also goes beyond the standard additive model: in the heteroskedastic Gaussian sequence model, a change of variables restores the required structure conditionally and yields new Tweedie representations.
When considering a model selection or, more generally, an aggregation approach for adaptive statistical inference, it is often necessary to compute estimators over a wide range of model complexities including unnecessarily large models even when the true data-generating process is relatively simple, due to the lack of prior knowledge. This requirement can lead to substantial computational inefficiency. In this work, we propose a novel framework for efficient model aggregation called the early-stopped aggregation (ESA): instead of computing and aggregating estimators for all candidate models, we compute only a small number of simpler ones using an early-stopping criterion and aggregate only these for final inference. Our framework is versatile and applies to both Bayesian model selection, in particular, within the variational Bayes framework, and frequentist estimation, including a general penalized estimation setting. We investigate adaptive optimal property of the ESA approach across three learning paradigms. We first show that ESA achieves optimal adaptive contraction rates in the variational Bayes setting under mild conditions. We extend this result to variational empirical Bayes, where prior hyperparameters are chosen in a data-dependent manner. In addition, we apply the ESA approach to frequentist aggregation including both penalization-based and sample-splitting implementations, and establish corresponding theory. As we demonstrate, there is a clear unification between early-stopped Bayes and frequentist penalized aggregation, with a common "energy" functional comprising a data-fitting term and a complexity-control term that drives both procedures. We further present several applications and numerical studies that highlight the efficiency and strong performance of the proposed approach.