arXiv:2608. 01378v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Design campaigns in chemistry, materials science, and machine learning share a bottleneck: determining how good a candidate truly is requires an expensive evaluation - an experiment, a first-principles simulation, or a full training run.
arXiv:2608. 14761v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: At a finite public-chance cut, counterfactual regret minimization (CFR) must choose how many outcomes to evaluate before each regret update.
arXiv:2607. 14545v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine-learned predictions can speed up offline NP-hard optimization, but asking a predictor what to do amounts to asking it to solve the problem, and committing an unchecked prediction forfeits every worst-case guarantee.
arXiv:2606. 15600v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Cardinality-estimation (CE) research ranks estimators by q-error, yet it is well known that q-error is an imperfect proxy for query-plan quality.
arXiv:2608. 06362v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deciding which of two agents is stronger means playing games until skill outweighs luck, and every game costs money, model inference, or expert time.
The paper introduces loss‑conditioned state execution, a model‑agnostic technique that decides whether to apply a world model’s proposed state change or keep the current state based on whether the change reduces downstream loss. It formalizes state movability as the existence of a loss‑reducing feasible correction and constructs loss‑specific proposals from predictive distributions, executing them only when a groupwise lower confidence bound on loss improvement is positive. Experiments on forecasting and dynamics benchmarks show that the method accepts updates for a subset of cases, achieving lower bounded loss than persistence or always executing the proposal, and highlights that event predictability and loss‑based decisions must be evaluated separately.
The paper introduces Online Hyperparameter Optimization (OHPO), framing it as an infinitely many‑armed bandit problem over mixed and conditional search spaces. It proposes the IMABO framework, which couples any bandit policy with any oracle for proposing new configurations, and presents IMOSS—a restart‑free anytime policy with provable regret bounds. Experiments show that IMABO, combined with practical oracles such as TPE, an incumbent‑mutation oracle, and a pretrained tabular foundation model, outperforms random search across a range of settings from classical ML models to LLM‑based agents.
The paper introduces OSCAR, an LLM‑based framework that translates business descriptions into accurate optimization models while verifying and improving them through a simulator, coder, and reviewer. OSCAR uses a cost‑ordered escalation strategy to select among LLMs of varying price and capability, achieving 95–100% accuracy on benchmark problems with local, open‑weight models. The framework also provides competitive guarantees and token‑cost advantages over existing LLMs like Codex and Claude Code.
The paper introduces a method to certify selective prediction in machine learning systems by computing the availability of safety gates through exact-binomial inversion and dynamic programming. It demonstrates that a truth-informed planner can significantly improve mean coverage over naive approaches, and that reallocating error budgets further enhances coverage across diverse applications such as LLM tool‑calling, content moderation, lesion classification, and recommendation. The study highlights the importance of planning and finite‑sample estimation in ensuring reliable, granular deployment of selective predictors.
arXiv:2607. 26253v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is bottlenecked by rollout generation, yet many sampled prompts produce saturated groups (all responses correct or all incorrect) whose zero reward variance yields no policy-gradient signal.
The paper introduces SELECT, an algorithmic framework for satisficing regret minimization in bandit problems, achieving constant expected satisficing regret when a satisficing arm exists. A variant, SELECT‑LITE, further ensures a light‑tailed satisficing regret distribution while maintaining constant expected regret in the realizable case and sub‑linear standard regret otherwise. Experiments on synthetic data and a real‑world dynamic pricing scenario demonstrate the practical effectiveness of both algorithms.
arXiv:2608. 13209v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Many operational decisions are sequences of interventions under a cumulative resource limit, such as a maintenance schedule within a crew-hour budget.