A Unified Perspective on Conformal Prediction and Wasserstein Distributionally Robust Optimization for Uncertainty Quantification

Uncertainty quantification from finite data is central to machine learning, optimization, and automation systems, where decisions must remain reliable under limited samples and test-time distribution shift. Conformal prediction (CP) and distributionally robust optimization (DRO) offer two complementary approaches: CP constructs data-dependent prediction sets with distribution-free finite-sample validity under exchangeability, while DRO optimizes worst-case performance over an ambiguity set around an empirical distribution. We develop a unified probabilistic perspective on CP and DRO by viewing both as ways to turn finite calibration data into a data-dependent quantile estimator that a test score falls below with high probability. From this perspective, CP and DRO correct the empirical quantile along two coordinates of the same family of estimators: CP inflates the quantile level, whereas DRO shifts the quantile value through an ambiguity radius. Both methods provide the same calibration-conditional guarantee for the true distribution, requiring the target coverage to hold with high probability over the calibration sample. Their constructions differ, however: CP uses a closed-form, distribution-free level correction, while DRO uses a value-space correction whose certified radius depends on properties of the unknown distribution and additionally guarantees coverage uniformly over the ambiguity set. This distinction emerges in the tails of the score distribution. Because CP relies on sparse upper-tail order statistics of the calibration samples, its level inflation barely moves the estimator when those samples are dense near the target quantile but overshoots when they are sparse, whereas a well-chosen DRO radius corrects in value space and may avoid this overshoot.

Generative Neural Networks for Sinkhorn Distributionally Robust Hypothesis Testing

This paper studies the Sinkhorn distributionally robust hypothesis testing (SDRHT) problem, seeking a robust detector against least-favorable distributions in Sinkhorn discrepancy-based ambiguity sets centered at the empirical distributions. Existing approaches solve this problem by solving large-scale conic programs, which are not scalable. To overcome this, we propose a generative framework that learns least-favorable distributions and supports efficient training and end-to-end sampling. For the Sinkhorn discrepancy-based ambiguity sets, we first derive an equivalent conditional-KL-divergence representation with respect to kernel-smoothed reference distributions. This property allows us to prove strong duality for both constrained and unconstrained minimax SDRHT formulations. Based on the closed-form optimal detector and Brenier's theorem, we reformulate the max-min dual formulation as a maximization problem over convex potentials whose gradients characterize invertible transport maps between kernel-smoothed distributions and their least-favorable counterparts. We efficiently approximate these potentials using Hyper Input Convex Neural Networks (HyCNNs) equipped with stochastic gradient estimators and prove the representation power of HyCNNs and the distributional universality of their induced transport maps. Numerical results show that the proposed method achieves superior accuracy and robustness across different sample sizes and dimensions, while avoiding the scalability limitations of classical SDRHT methods.

Generalised Transportability via Causal Abstractions

Transporting a causal conclusion from a source study population to a target one is a fundamental problem in causal inference. The theory of transportability provides a criterion for when this is possible: given experimental data from the source and observational data from the target, it determines whether a target query is identifiable and does so completely; i.e. if the query can be transported, the criterion finds the exact formula. However, it works one query at a time and returns an expression rather than the value itself. It is also silent in two practically important regimes: when the query is not transportable and when no target data exist at all. To tackle both, we take a model-level perspective grounded in Causal Abstraction theory. Source and target share variables, graph, and interventions, differing only at a known set of mechanisms, which makes transportability a special case of same-level abstraction. Thus, instead of asking whether one query transports, we ask whether a single map aligns the source and target across their interventional behaviour. We characterise when such a map exists in both the Markovian and semi-Markovian settings; when it does, every target query transports at once. Our main contribution lies in the approximate case. When no exact map exists, the best approximate one still yields certified query intervals, recasting abstraction error as a quantitative notion of approximate transportability. We formulate model-level transport as distributionally robust optimisation over mechanism and environment perturbations of the unseen target and derive certificates for both challenging regimes: bounds for non-transportable queries, and guarantees under target-agnostic settings. We evaluate our framework on synthetic Markovian and semi-Markovian benchmarks and a real ecological dataset, and we show that the certified intervals bracket the true interventional query.

The Sample Complexity of Distributionally Robust PAC Learning under Cressie--Read Divergences

We study distributionally robust PAC learning for the $0$--$1$-loss, where adversarial perturbations of the data distribution are constrained by a Cressie--Read divergence of order $k>1$ and radius $ρ\geq 0$. For hypothesis classes with VC dimension $d$, we establish realizable and agnostic sample-complexity bounds tight up to constant and logarithmic factors, respectively; ordinary empirical risk minimization attains both rates up to logarithmic factors. For target accuracy $\varepsilon\in(0,1)$ and confidence $δ\in(0,1)$, their respective orders are \[ \max\!\left\{\frac{1}{\varepsilon}, \frac{ρ^{\frac 1{k-1}}}{\varepsilon^{k_\star}} \right\}\cdot(d+\log δ^{-1}) \qquad\text{and}\qquad \max\!\left\{\frac{1}{\varepsilon^2}, \frac{ρ^{\frac1{k-1}}}{\varepsilon^{k_\star\vee 2}} \right\}\cdot(d+\log δ^{-1}), \] where $k_\star={k}/{(k-1)}$. For every fixed $ρ>0$, robustness changes the realizable $\varepsilon$-dependence from $\varepsilon^{-1}$ to $\varepsilon^{-k_\star}$ as $\varepsilon\downarrow0$. In the agnostic case, for $1<k<2$, robustness changes the $\varepsilon$-dependence from $\varepsilon^{-2}$ to $\varepsilon^{-k_\star}$, whereas for $k\geq2$ the exponent remains the classical $2$, with nontrivial $ρ$-dependence. Building on the known scalar reduction of robust $0$--$1$ risk to ordinary classification error, our analysis reveals a scale-sensitive interaction between the statistical estimation of classification error and its amplification by robustness, sharply explaining the transition in the agnostic rate. We extend the previously studied $χ^2$-divergence case to every Cressie--Read order $k>1$, close its upper--lower gaps, and recover standard PAC learning rates as $ρ\to0$, unlike previous bounds that fail to interpolate correctly in this limit.

Achieving First-Order Statistical Improvements in Data-Driven Optimization: From No-Free-Lunch to Amplified Decision Perturbation

Recent proliferation of data-optimization integration has led to a range of methods that aim to improve the statistical performance of data-driven optimization decisions. However, while many of these methods are motivated intuitively from a robustness or regularization perspective, their resulting statistical benefits are often unclear and, even if available, are established on a case-by-case basis. We provide a systematic dissection of data-driven optimization formulations using the view of "directionally perturbed" empirical optimization (EO). Specifically, this umbrella of formulations, which we call "EO+", covers many existing data-driven optimization methods, including regularization, distributionally robust optimization, transfer learning, and analogous methods for contextual optimization. On the one hand, we argue that without additional, correctly specified, side information, any EO+ method can result in at most second-order improvements. This provides a negative conclusion, namely ``no free lunch is possible", on the statistical power of EO+. On the other hand, we show that when leveraging side information that is geometrically effective, achieving first-order improvements is possible by choosing hyperparameters that are significantly larger than what is typically suggested in the literature. Moreover, we construct a principled methodology based on excess risk estimation, via either system knowledge or bootstrap resampling, to maximize the first-order gain. We demonstrate how this gain connects to the control-variate principle, a variance reduction technique in the Monte Carlo simulation literature, which helps explain why geometrically effective side information is necessary.

Generative Distributionally Robust Optimization

Generative models are increasingly adopted in distributionally robust optimization (DRO), but existing approaches trade off model compatibility and adversarial structure: methods that accept arbitrary samplers do not restrict worst-case laws to a generator family, while generator-parameterized adversaries rely on model-specific access such as likelihoods, scores, or training data. We propose Generative Distributionally Robust Optimization (GDRO), a principled framework that accepts any sampleable conditional generator as the nominal model and restricts worst-case laws to a chosen conditional generator family. The key is the sampler-Sinkhorn pairing: samplers represent the conditional laws exactly, while Sinkhorn divergence compares their induced distributions without likelihood access and can be estimated from samples alone. The resulting population problem admits a direct finite-sample approximation and differentiable primal-dual implementation at the active decision context. For Lipschitz losses, the population Sinkhorn radius bounds downstream degradation. Across explicit and implicit generators, our method reduces rare-context inventory regret by 60% and SocialGAN navigation collisions by 50% relative to nominal decisions.

Decision Making Needs Uncertainty Quantification [Lecture Notes]

Many signal processing systems ultimately exist to {act}. Whenever the state variable that determines the action to be taken by a decision maker, or agent, is uncertain, the way that uncertainty is represented decides how well the agent performs and how much its performance can be trusted. This lecture note develops, from first principles and within a single decision-theoretic setting, the link between the {objective} and the knowledge of an agent and the form of uncertainty representation that is sufficient to act optimally. To start, assuming a known environment distribution, we show that a risk-neutral agent needs the posterior distribution over the state, whereas a risk-averse agent can rely without loss of optimality on a {prediction set} and a worst-case decision rule. We then turn to the case in which the environment is unknown, and identify three complementary approaches to address the resulting epistemic uncertainty: calibration of a fixed predictor, credal (ambiguity) sets with distributionally robust optimization, and Bayesian inference over model parameters. The common thread is that reliable decisions require an uncertainty representation matched to the decision objective and to the knowledge profile of the agent, together with a guarantee that certifies the utility the agent will actually obtain.

Learning Predictive Ambiguity Sets for Decision-Focused Distributionally Robust Optimization

Predict-then-optimize systems usually compress uncertainty into a point forecast and then solve a downstream optimization problem as if the forecast were reliable. Distributionally robust optimization (DRO) offers protection against misspecification, but the ambiguity set is often centered at historical samples and uses a fixed radius. We propose \emph{learned predictive ambiguity sets} (LPAS): a deep contextual model outputs a finite nominal scenario distribution, a state-dependent Wasserstein radius, and optionally an anisotropic ground metric. These outputs define a contextual ambiguity set that feeds a DRO decision layer. The radius is trained by a combination of conditional quantile calibration, size regularization, and downstream decision loss, so that robustness is adaptive rather than globally fixed. We derive the finite dual form used by the decision layer, present a staged training algorithm, and evaluate the method on distributionally robust portfolio optimization with 20 S&P 500 constituents from 2018--2026. The proposed method substantially improves over equal-weight, predict-then-optimize, and historical Wasserstein DRO baselines, achieving 26.28% annualized return, Sharpe ratio 1.30, final wealth 1.61, and lower tail loss than a deep fixed-radius DRO baseline while using a smaller average radius. The results show that learned ambiguity radii can recover most of the performance of strong fixed-radius DRO while reducing unnecessary conservatism and improving regime adaptivity.

PeTeR: Post-Training Robustification of Probabilistic Circuits

Probabilistic circuits (PCs) can model complex joint distributions while supporting exact and efficient computation of many inference queries. However, standard likelihood-based PC learning is vulnerable to overfitting and fragile generalization when confronted with data noise, small sample sizes, or distribution shifts. This can be mitigated using distributionally-robust optimization which consider worst-case distributions within a Wasserstein ball of the empirical distribution, but current methods are limited to training a model from scratch in this framework. Instead, we propose PeTeR: a novel, data-free post-training framework designed to robustify pre-trained PCs against distribution shifts without retraining from scratch. Empirical evaluations across multiple density estimation benchmarks demonstrate that PeTeR effectively robustifies baseline models against both random and adversarial perturbations, achieving competitive or superior performance to data-dependent robust learning baselines.

Distributionally Robust Linear Regression With Block Lewis Weights

We present an algorithm for the group distributionally robust (GDR) least squares problem. Given $m$ groups, a parameter vector in $\mathbb{R}^d$, and stacked design matrices and responses $\mathbf{A}$ and $\mathbf{b}$, our algorithm obtains a $(1+\varepsilon)$-multiplicative optimal solution using $\widetilde{O}(\min\{\mathsf{rank}(\mathbf{A}),m\}^{1/3}\varepsilon^{-2/3})$ linear-system-solves of matrices of the form $\mathbf{A}^{\top}\mathbf{B}\mathbf{A}$ for block-diagonal $\mathbf{B}$. Our technical methods follow from a recent geometric construction, block Lewis weights, that relates the empirical GDR problem to a carefully chosen least squares problem and an application of accelerated proximal methods. Our algorithm improves over known interior point methods for moderate accuracy regimes and matches the state-of-the-art guarantees for the special case of $\ell_{\infty}$ regression. We also give algorithms that smoothly interpolate between minimizing the average least squares loss and the distributionally robust loss.

Sampler-Robust Optimization under Generative Models

Modern stochastic optimization pipelines increasingly rely on learned generative models to represent uncertainty, while downstream decisions are evaluated almost entirely through Monte Carlo scenarios. This shifts the operational object of uncertainty from an explicit probability law to the sampler induced by the learned generator. Reliability therefore depends on two errors: sampler misspecification and finite-simulation error. We propose Sampler-Robust Optimization (SRO), which optimizes decisions against the worst-case sampler induced by perturbing the learned generator. This sampler-first formulation aligns with simulation-based decision pipelines and admits a sharpness-aware interpretation: it favors decisions whose performance is stable under generator perturbations, rather than merely under the nominal sampler. Under a coverage assumption, we show that the empirical worst-case objective provides a high-probability upper certificate for the true population objective, with finite-simulation error partially absorbed by the robustification used to guard against sampler misspecification. The framework accommodates generative models with or without explicit densities and admits efficient minimax procedures. Portfolio-optimization experiments show that SRO produces more stable decisions and improves out-of-sample performance under distribution shift.