On efficiency gains via augmenting a tiny sample with a massive auxiliary sample

In this paper, we study the problem of augmenting a tiny target sample with a massive auxiliary sample. Utilizing Tukey's factorization, there are two popular approaches: the inverse probability weight (IPW) and the full-likelihood (FL) methods. We show that the IPW approach suffers from the limited target sample problem while the FL method may estimate some model parameters at the rate of the massive auxiliary sample size, a phenomenon we call full efficiency gain. We study the theory behind the full efficiency gain for exponential families and mixtures of exponential families. We also study the efficiency gain for the IPW method under a nonparametric procedure and show how it can achieve a parametric rate of the target sample size. As a side note, we also discuss how one may use FL to train neural network models simultaneously for both the target distribution and the odds model.

Tailoring Strictly Proper Scoring Rules for Downstream Tasks: An Application to Causal Inference

Probabilistic models are typically trained using task-agnostic objectives like log-loss, which can lead to significant errors in downstream estimation. This disconnect is especially critical in Inverse Probability Weighting (IPW) for causal inference, where propensity score errors near $0$ and $1$ often lead to high bias and variance. We propose a principled framework for deriving task-specific strictly proper scoring rules by matching the local curvature of the downstream error metric. We apply this to the Average Treatment Effect (ATE) estimation, deriving a closed-form loss and its corresponding canonical probability mapping that can be readily integrated with any model like a neural network or a gradient boosting algorithm. Extensive evaluations on causal inference benchmarks demonstrate that our tailored objective consistently outperforms standard likelihood-based and covariate-balancing approaches.

Who Trains Matters: Federated Learning under Enrollment and Participation Selection Biases

Federated learning (FL) trains a shared model from updates contributed by distributed clients, often implicitly assuming that contributing clients are representative of the target population. In practice, this representativeness assumption can fail at two distinct stages, inducing selection bias. First, eligibility rules such as device constraints, software requirements, or user consent determine which clients are ever enrolled and reachable for training, inducing \emph{enrollment bias}. Second, among enrolled clients, user and system factors such as battery state, network status, and local time determine which clients participate in each communication round, inducing \emph{participation bias}. Although existing work has largely addressed round-level participation bias, it has paid far less attention to population-level enrollment bias, which can induce a persistent mismatch between the training objective and the target-population objective. We formalize FL under a two-stage selection model and derive \textsc{FedIPW}, an inverse-probability-weighted aggregation scheme that recovers the target-population mean update under standard ignorability and positivity assumptions. Because client-level covariates are often unavailable for non-enrolled clients, we also introduce a limited-information aggregate-calibration extension that uses known target-population summaries to reweight the enrolled sample, partially correcting enrollment bias. We further provide an algorithm-agnostic optimization analysis under residual weighting error and show that incomplete selection correction can induce a non-vanishing bias floor. Finally, experiments on synthetic federated logistic regression validate the predicted objective mismatch and show that enrollment correction reduces target-population error under two-stage selection.