Laura Iacovissi, Rabanus Derr, Robert C. Williamsoncs.LG math.ST stat.ML
A key result in statistics is the data processing inequality, originally proved by Blackwell (1951) and later refined by DeGroot (1962) in terms of statistical uncertainty. It states that the Bayes risk of a statistical experiment obtained by stochastically modifying another experiment cannot be lower than the Bayes risk of the original experiment, regardless of the loss function or prior chosen. In machine learning, this result underlies applications such as the information bottleneck principle and some feature learning techniques. However, machine learning problems are constrained learning problems: the model class used does not include all measurable functions. We present a simple counterexample showing that the classical data processing inequality fails to hold in such a setting. Hence, we formulate a generalized data processing inequality, requiring the constrained Bayes risk of a joint distribution (with respect to a loss function and a constrained hypothesis class) to lower bound the constrained Bayes risk on the stochastically modified distribution, regardless of the choice of distribution. We show this inequality to be equivalent to a set containment condition on a specific function set induced by the loss and model class, called the superprediction set. Finally, we derive sufficient conditions for this containment.
Agents that act on a compressed representation of their history face a structural risk: if the representation aliases histories with different optimal actions, no rule measurable with respect to the representation can avoid an irreducible per-round loss, and the agent may be unable to detect this from its own transcript. This paper develops a four-layer theory of self-certification of representation adequacy. The static layer defines decision-theoretic adequacy through a Bayes-risk grouping identity and prices a one-shot external verification by an exact total-variation threshold. The sequential layer poses certification as an optimal-stopping problem in the currency of task loss: we define an environment-wise certification complexity constant through a covering linear program, prove an information-task-loss lower bound for every delta-correct strategy, and give a Certification Track-and-Stop policy whose cost matches the bound asymptotically. A final boundary layer gives an explicit kernel-switching example and identifies the open theorem needed to cover policy switching or representation repair; it does not claim that the fixed-kernel guarantees extend to representation revision. The proofs of the two main theorems are given in full in the appendices.
Machine-learning benchmarks often pair a label that aggregates a long temporal horizon with input observed through one or a few short windows. Their apparent performance ceiling may therefore be an acquisition-protocol ceiling rather than a model-capacity ceiling. We study labels of the form $Θ_{g,T}=T^{-1}\int_0^T g\{Z(t)\}\,\mathrm{d}t$ when the latent Gaussian process contains both a stable individual trait and a correlated within-individual state. An exact protocol-conditioned Bayes-risk identity provides a common tool. First, we decompose label variance into an $O(1)$ trait component and an $O(T^{-1})$ state component, explaining why a snapshot can retain cross-sectional predictability while poorly tracking within-person change. Second, we derive task-dependent effective temporal spans: mean labels depend on the ordinary correlation time, whereas occupation-time labels depend on an entire spectrum of higher-order correlation times. Third, state-driven occupation-label variance is maximal when the stable trait lies at the threshold; window efficiency decays much more slowly away from that boundary. Under an equal segment budget, exact risks and Monte Carlo experiments show that repeated segments at one time rapidly saturate, whereas temporally dispersed observations continue to increase state explainability. The trait ceiling uses quantities available from ordinary test-retest data; only the state ceiling requires short-lag temporal calibration. The results distinguish architectural limits from protocol limits and show that the label, rather than duration or segment count alone, defines the relevant timescale.
Feature rankings are widely used in supervised feature selection because they are simple, scalable and easy to interpret. Variables are first ranked by a relevance score, and a subset is then obtained by retaining the top-ranked variables. Although the first stage has been extensively studied, the second is often governed by an arbitrary cardinality, an empirical threshold or cross-validation, without a direct interpretation. This raises a basic question: given a feature ranking, when is there enough accumulated class-separation evidence to stop selecting features? This paper develops a distributional framework for transforming supervised feature rankings into class-independent subsets through an explicit risk-calibrated stopping rule. For each variable and each pair of classes, marginal separation is measured by the Bhattacharyya coefficient between the corresponding class-conditional distributions. The proposed method selects a single global subset shared by all classes by retaining the shortest prefix of a ranking whose residual product overlap falls below a prescribed threshold for every relevant class contrast. We derive binary and multiclass Bayes-risk bounds for the labelled product marginal problem, and obtain prior-dependent and prior-free calibrations of the residual-overlap threshold from a target all-pairs risk level. An empirical comparison on high-dimensional genomic datasets illustrates that the rule can reduce tens of thousands of variables to a few dozen while maintaining predictive performance statistically comparable to the all-features baseline. As the stopping rule only requires one-dimensional marginal overlap estimates and scans a precomputed ranking, it is well suited to very high-dimensional settings where exhaustive subset search is infeasible and interpretable truncation of feature rankings is essential.
Quantitative research across the social and behavioral sciences depends on human subject experiments that are expensive, slow, and subject to sampling bias. Here we show that pretrained large language models induce risk-equivalent estimators of conditional expectations under squared loss, establishing restricted functional risk equivalence: under squared loss, the LLM induces an estimator whose risk matches the Bayes optimal risk for squared-loss prediction of conditional expectations for any inference that depends on the data only through the conditional mean. We formalize the LLM as a misspecified functional estimator $T(\hat{P}_n)$ trained on i.i.d.\ data, decompose the estimation error into representation bias $ε_{\mathrm{rep}}$ and optimization error, and prove that under mild regularity conditions the LLM's expected error converges to the irreducible population variance plus the squared representation bias, with the representation bias bounded by the Pinsker inequality. The identifiability error $δ$ propagates into the effective bias, inflating the asymptotic risk floor. We establish restricted functional risk equivalence via a bidirectional Le Cam deficiency analysis: the forward deficiency vanishes asymptotically while the reverse deficiency is exactly zero. We provide finite-sample concentration bounds and a calibration protocol with explicit decision rules. The result is a precise, provable statement: a well-calibrated LLM achieves the Bayes-optimal risk for conditional-mean-dependent inference, bounded by explicit scope conditions. In practical applications, this means that under satisfied conditions and well-calibrated models, large language models can be used in many prediction and decision-making tasks that originally relied on human experiments, approximating near-optimal statistical inference at lower cost.