Prediction error is widely used to evaluate nuisance-function estimators in causal inference, but its relationship with causal estimator performance may differ across performance measures. We studied this question in a partially linear model using Monte Carlo simulations. We compared ordinary least squares (OLS), generalized additive models (GAMs), XGBoost, and Double Machine Learning with XGBoost (DML-XGBoost), evaluating nuisance-function prediction error, bias, RMSE, and 95\% confidence interval coverage. We also examined a simple joint-error measure based on the absolute cross-product of estimation errors from the exposure and outcome nuisance functions. Across the simulated settings, XGBoost had the lowest RMSE among the non-oracle methods, while DML-XGBoost generally provided better confidence interval coverage. Prediction error did not consistently track causal bias across methods and settings, and the method with the best point-estimation performance did not necessarily have the best confidence interval coverage. The joint-error measure was only weakly associated with causal bias and did not provide a useful standalone measure of causal performance. These results suggest that prediction error is useful for assessing nuisance-function estimation, but it should not be treated as a direct measure of the quality of the resulting causal estimator.
Sheng Lun Christine Cao, Destenie Nock, Alex Daviscs.LG
Discrete choice modeling is a common tool used for preference elicitation during policy-making, but this is typically done through parametric models. Machine learning can push the boundaries of discrete choice modeling for policy-based preference elicitation by adopting a data-driven approach or learning individual preferences. However, there is limited knowledge of how well machine learning methods can estimate individual discrete choice rules under individual heterogeneity, especially in the context of challenges often experienced during preference elicitation. This study evaluates four machine learning models (multinomial logistic regression, generalized additive model, twinned neural network, and Gaussian process) with respect to their capacity to learn and predict five choice rules that are important in the behavioral and social sciences (linear strong utility, monotonic strong utility, ideal point, lexicographic semiorder, and multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator). Monte Carlo experiments were performed to assess model performance when increasing a) the number of attributes in the choice alternatives, b) the number of training choice sets, and c) the choice rule's determinism. The simulation results demonstrated that semi-parametric and non-parametric models generally outperform parametric models across all choice rules and experimental contexts. Model performance also generally improves by 6% to 96% and 0% to 55%, respectively, with an increase in training choice sets and choice rule determinism. A case study using real energy policy preference data was also conducted, where TNN performed best with a BIC of 13.351. This work demonstrated the viability and limitations of semi-parametric and non-parametric models in the context of policy-centric discrete choice modeling and showed how the choice task context should drive model selection.
The rapid growth of chiplet-based artificial intelligence systems-on-chip (SoCs) has exposed a fundamental gap in semiconductor test methodology. Existing Known Good Die (KGD) screening guarantees pre-assembly functional correctness, yet it offers no probabilistic assurance of post-assembly reliability lifetime. To address this limitation, the present work formalizes the transition from KGD to Known Good Reliable Die (KGRD) screening as a constrained inference problem over incomplete pre-assembly observability. Building upon this formulation, four interlocking contributions are presented: (i) a Bayesian probabilistic risk model that maps pre-assembly telemetry to post-assembly failure likelihood with a quantified observability bias bound; (ii) a safety-gated decision architecture that provides a provable post-assembly failure probability guarantee; (iii) uncertainty-aware disposition boundaries derived from Bayes-optimal decision theory; and (iv) a constrained closed-loop feedback mechanism that delivers consistent model improvement without violating reliability constraints. A Monte Carlo simulation study on N = 4,000 synthetic dies verifies all four theoretical properties and confirms that the safety guarantee holds uniformly across the full range of tested gate threshold.
Xianglin Ji, Svetlana V. Boriskinacs.AI cond-mat.mtrl-sci
We introduce PHITSBench, an execution-scored benchmark for the Monte Carlo Particle and Heavy Ion Transport code System (PHITS). PHITSBench comprises 282 transport-scorable tasks spanning three common workflow categories: parameter editing (Edit), syntax repair (Repair ), and complete simulation generation from natural-language descriptions (Reproduce). Each task is evaluated using a Composite Metric Score that combines execution success with agreement between generated and reference transport observables. Using PHITSBench, we evaluate five GPT-5.4-based configurations ranging from zero-shot prompting to knowledge-augmented and agentic workflows. Without domain-specific knowledge, the model performs well on editing and repair tasks (95% and 70% success, respectively) but fails to generate correct simulations from scratch (0% success on the Reproduce track). A structured, machine-readable PHITS knowledge catalog, supplied alongside the user manual, raises single-shot Reproduce-task success to 57%. Agentic execution provides a further improvement to 66-73%, but at increased computational cost. Failure analysis shows that the remaining errors are dominated by incorrect selection and configuration of physical observables rather than syntax generation. These results suggest that future progress in AI-assisted radiation-transport modeling will depend as much on machine-readable knowledge bases, curated domain-training datasets, and execution-grounded evaluation environments as on advances in foundation models themselves.
As CMOS technology scales into the deep nanometer regime, digital circuit reliability is increasingly threatened by the combined stochastic effects of Bias Temperature Instability (BTI) and Process Variation (PV). Traditional reliability analysis methods, which rely on computationally intensive simulations or extensive lookup tables, fail to scale efficiently for large designs, creating a critical bottleneck in design space exploration. To address this, we propose SMART, a novel framework that integrates Machine Learning (ML) with Monte Carlo simulation to enable rapid, high-fidelity reliability analysis. SMART employs Random Forest regression to predict gate delay distributions directly, bypassing time-consuming atomic model parameter extractions. Crucially, the model utilizes Bayesian Optimization for automated hyperparameter tuning, ensuring maximum predictive robustness across diverse libraries. Experimental validation on ISCAS85 benchmark circuits demonstrates that SMART achieves a 94.54% reduction in analysis time compared to state-of-the-art methods, while maintaining a remarkable average accuracy error of just 1.63%. By shifting computational complexity to an offline training phase, the proposed framework offers a scalable, accurate solution for designing resilient, reliability-aware digital systems.
Zhenshan Chen, Klaus Moeltner, Matthew Mairecon.EM stat.ML
Hedonic price models are widely used to assess how environmental amenities affect property values, yet methodological guidance for estimating direct price effects remains sparse. We conduct an empirical Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate the performance of traditional and causal machine learning approaches for estimating the direct unmediated price effect of spatially delineated amenities on treated properties (DUET), a conservative lower-bound approximation for welfare changes with direct applications to benefit-cost analysis. Where previous simulations rely on parametric assumptions, we retain the actual data-generating process underlying over 1 million property transactions from upstate New York (1990--2024). By randomly assigning "treatment locations" across iterations we establish a "ground truth" that allows us to precisely measure estimation error. Our results demonstrate that generalized difference-in-differences (DID) regression consistently outperforms baseline DID and two-way fixed effects models across all scenarios. Causal Machine Learning (CML) methods, particularly causal forest DID, achieve comparable performance to generalized DID in most scenarios. In larger samples (above 3,000 treated) increasingly common in contemporary hedonic studies, CML approaches offer substantial advantages when properly specified. Based on empirical simulation results, we provide a set of method-specific best practice recommendations for both traditional regression and causal machine learning approaches.