探索全球前沿学术脉络

Conformal Candidate Certification for Offline Model-Based Optimization

arXiv:2606.15217v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Offline model-based optimization (MBO) proposes candidates by optimizing a surrogate trained on a fixed historical dataset. Because candidates are deliberately out-of-distribution, surrogate rankings are least reliable exactly where the optimizer is most aggressive, yet existing methods provide no per-candidate statistical certificate that a design meets a target threshold. We propose Conformal Candidate Certification (CCC), a post-hoc wrapper that attaches a calibrated one-sided lower bound to each candidate and advances only those whose bound exceeds the target. We show that entropy-regularized surrogate maximization induces a Gibbs-tilted proposal, so the same surrogate supplies importance weights for weighted conformal prediction without a separate density-ratio estimation step. In a controlled synthetic study, CCC certifies $16.7\%$ of an aggressive proposal pool with empirical coverage 0.990 at nominal 0.90, while standard conformal prediction ignoring the covariate shift collapses to 0.416 coverage.

Conformal Bayes under Label Shift: Post-Hoc Calibration vs. In-Training Adaptation

arXiv:2606.11865v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Conformal Bayes combines Bayesian posterior predictives with conformal calibration to produce prediction sets that are both statistically valid and geometrically efficient. We study conformal Bayes under label shift from a unified perspective, identifying two complementary approaches that restore nominal target-domain coverage through importance-weighted conformal calibration but operate through independent mechanisms. Post-hoc calibration tilts the posterior predictive toward the target domain and corrects the conformal threshold via an importance-weighted quantile, leaving the parameter posterior unchanged. In-training adaptation tilts the parameter posterior itself to the target domain, producing a corrected predictive whose highest predictive density region serves as the highest predictive density (HPD) based prediction set under the fitted target predictive; efficiency is model-dependent and does not imply finite-sample conditional optimality. Two controlled experiments show that in an unbiased training regime both strategies achieve valid coverage equally, while in a lead-optimization regime in-training adaptation acts as a debiasing operator, reducing interval width at unchanged coverage.

Anytime-Valid Confirmation of Label-Shift Corrections

arXiv:2606.14028v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In small-batch scientific deployments, labeled target outcomes may be too scarce for reliable shift estimation even when unlabeled target inputs are available. We address the complementary setting where the practitioner has a pre-specified label-shift correction from domain knowledge and asks whether incoming labeled outcomes support it. We show that the per-observation likelihood ratio between a label-shift-corrected predictive and the source predictive is a conditional e-value, so its running product is a nonnegative martingale and Ville's inequality yields an anytime-valid confirmation rule. The log martingale equals the cumulative negative log-predictive density (NLPD) gap between the source and the corrected predictive, converting routine model monitoring into a formal sequential test. Rejection means the incoming data support the posited correction relative to the source predictive, but it is not a precise estimate of the degree of shift. Closed forms are available for GP sources with Gaussian label-shift ratios. GP regression simulations validate Type I control, finite-sample power, miscalibration sensitivity, and the small-batch advantage of a reliable prior over label-based re-estimation.