Variable selection methods that control the false discovery rate often lose power when predictors exhibit complex dependence structures. We previously showed that selecting hierarchically clustered groups of predictors can mitigate this issue while maintaining false discovery rate control. When correlations are less structured, however, overlapping predictor sets may be more effective. We introduce a generalized false discovery rate for hypotheses defined on sets of predictors and propose a hypergraph-based selection method. This approach achieves higher power across diverse settings while preserving rigorous false discovery rate control.

We propose a mixture of location-scale skewed-$t$ distributions to fit bimodal, skewed and heavy-tailed data. In particular, the mixture is based on the skewed-$t$ distribution by Fernández and Steel (1998), so that the model-building procedure can be easily extended to mixtures of other symmetric distributions. After studying the properties of the mixture, we develop a maximum likelihood estimation approach via the EM algorithm and a likelihood ratio test of the null hypothesis of no skewness in any given component. A simulation-based comparison to a recently proposed mixture of g-and-h distributions suggests that the performance of the proposed model is excellent, in terms of both estimation precision in well-specified setups and modeling capability in mis-specified frameworks. Fitting the model to the Standard & Poor's 500 distortion allows us to confirm the bimodality of its distribution, with the implication that the US stock market has historically been in bearish or bullish conditions, rather than near its fundamental value.

Unanchored indirect treatment comparisons using single-arm studies or disconnected evidence are increasingly used in health technology assessment (HTA) when randomized evidence is unavailable. Existing methods, including matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) and simulated treatment comparison (STC), are generally limited to pairwise settings and typically estimate marginal effects in the comparator study population, which may differ from the decision-relevant population. We propose multilevel unanchored meta-regression (ML-UMR), a Bayesian regression framework for synthesizing individual patient data and aggregate data from fully disconnected evidence. ML-UMR extends multilevel network meta-regression (ML-NMR) to unanchored settings by jointly modeling individual- and aggregate-level data within a unified likelihood, enabling estimation of treatment-specific outcomes and both marginal and conditional effects across multiple treatments, studies, and target populations. ML-UMR distinguishes assumptions required to identify treatment effects from those required to transport results to target populations. As with all unanchored comparisons, valid inference relies on strong and often unverifiable assumptions, including conditional exchangeability, correct specification of the outcome model, and cross-treatment assumptions (e.g., shared prognostic factor assumption (SPFA)). ML-UMR does not lessen these requirements but makes them explicit within a unified framework and facilitates sensitivity analyses. In simulation studies, ML-UMR produced low bias and nominal coverage for comparator-population effects. Transportability to alternative populations depended critically on identifying assumptions: violations of SPFA led to bias under strong effect modification, whereas incorporating subgroup information restored near-unbiased estimation and nominal coverage.

Uncertain data without frequency stability often arises in experimental design. Classical fixed-effects models can only analyze precise experimental data. Based on an uncertain measure, this paper establishes uncertain fixed-effect models for Latin-square designs. First, we propose three methods with uncertainty to estimate the treatment and blocked effects and construct their confidence intervals. Then, uncertain homogeneity and common tests are conducted to assess the significance of treatment effects. In the numerical simulations, the three estimation methods are compared based on bias, mean squared error, mean absolute error, overall standard deviation, coverage probability, and average interval length. Several examples are given to illustrate the process of estimation and hypothesis. Finally, the uncertain fixed-effects model is applied to real education data, demonstrating its practical value.

We propose a Bayesian nonparametric approach using a truncated Enriched Dirichlet Process mixture (EDPM) model to estimate natural direct (NDE) and indirect (NIE) effects in causal mediation analyses in the presence of post-treatment confounders. We introduce an efficient cluster reallocation Metropolis-Hasting algorithm to improve mixing in the blocked Gibbs sampler. We implement a one-step posterior correction based on the efficient influence function for our setting. This post-processing step solves a critical problem in Bayesian nonparametrics: how to obtain reliable estimates and posteriors for a specific causal estimand of interest (the NDE and NIE) with excellent frequentist properties, such as correct coverage, from a model designed for complex joint distributions. We conduct simulation studies to assess our method's performance and apply it to evaluate causal mediation effects in a weight management clinical trial.

The statistical modeling of consensus in Delphi data faces a critical bottleneck: the high dimensionality of questionnaire items relative to the limited sample size of expert panels. This rank deficiency leads traditional latent variable models, such as Principal Component Analysis, to be structurally unstable and prone to overfitting. Addressing this methodological gap, this study proposes a transition from variable-centric covariance models to network-centric connectivity models. By mapping item correlations onto a weighted graph topology, we present a simulation-based benchmark that utilizes community detection algorithms to identify latent thematic structures, effectively addressing the spectral instability and rank deficiency typical of high-dimensional, low-sample-size regimes. The research systematically evaluates the robustness of topological approaches based on structural density, information flow, and spectral partitioning against synthetic datasets designed to replicate the pathological conditions of consensus data, including ordinal scales and systemic noise. The central methodological contribution lies in demonstrating that collinearity among expert judgments - traditionally treated as statistical redundancy to be regularized - can be effectively reinterpreted as a topological signal of cohesion. This framework provides researchers with a structured and automated procedure for dimensionality reduction, ensuring structural stability and psychometric consistency even in small-sample regimes where standard factor analysis breaks down.

This paper investigates the problem of comparing the location parameters of two shifted exponential models through a novel double sequential sampling framework. The proposed hypothesis testing procedure is developed by controlling the type I error probability at a preassigned level while minimizing a loss function that incorporates both the type II error probability and the associated sampling cost. The corresponding optimal fixed-sample-size expressions are shown to depend on unknown scale parameters, rendering the desired testing accuracies unattainable in practice under fixed-sample designs. To overcome this difficulty, a double sequential sampling procedure is proposed to test the difference between location parameters when the scale parameters are unknown and unequal. The proposed methodology is shown to possess desirable asymptotic properties, including first-order efficiency, second-order efficiency, and second-order risk efficiency. Extensive simulation studies and a real-data application that involves heavy precipitation episodes at meteorological stations demonstrate the practical effectiveness and applicability of the proposed procedure.

In time-to-event analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) derived from the Cox proportional hazards (PH) model is the most commonly used and widely reported measure for assessing treatment effects. However, hazard ratios are non-collapsible due to their inherent conditioning on survival up to each time point. As a result, they are subject to built-in selection bias in the presence of unmeasured heterogeneity arising from omitted important covariates, even when these covariates are independent of the main exposure at baseline, as is the case in randomized controlled trials. This article aims to provide an overview of key findings from the literature on how unobserved heterogeneity, due to omitted covariates that affect the outcome, can bias the estimation of the treatment hazard ratio in standard proportional hazards models, even in randomized trials where treatment is assigned independently of such covariates. Through simulations, we evaluate the extent of bias in the semi-parametric Cox PH model and parametric PH model under various scenarios of unmeasured heterogeneity. We then compare these standard models to alternative approaches that either account for this issue or are considered robust to it. These alternatives include the hazard ratio estimated from frailty models, regression parameters from an Accelerated Failure Time (AFT) model, and survival differences between treatment groups estimated nonparametrically using Kaplan-Meier curves or based on a Cox model with time-dependent effect of the exposure. We illustrate the practical relevance of the explored alternatives through a real data application to a randomized controlled trial from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG 9202).

Recurrent events or competing risks regression models are often applied in the bio-medical setting and both can be considered as marginal models. In presence of right-censoring, such models need to be adjusted to give consistent estimators. When censoring is administrative, marginal regression models are particularly easy to estimate. However, when censoring is instead acting randomly, inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) adjustments are typically considered to obtain parameter estimates. This technique relies on a censoring-weights adjustment via a correct censoring model, but for administrative censoring the adjustment is done correctly simply by modifying the risk-set. In practice for large central registries or some clinical trials, the administrative censoring time will be known for all subjects, but there will typically also be a proportion of subjects that are censored at random. In this work, we consider two frequently used regression approaches, the Ghosh-Lin model for recurrent events with terminal events and the Fine-Gray model for competing events. For these two settings, when both administrative and random censoring are present, we demonstrate how to obtain correct estimation by dealing with the combination of the two different types of censoring relying on a minimum of modeling assumptions.

Large scale genetic datasets often aggregate the total allele counts of distinct genetic markers. Inferring haplotype frequencies (i.e.\ the frequency of multimarker alleles) from these pooled data is a challenge. Previous spatio-temporal modelling in this context has been limited to 3 markers due to the computational cost. In this work, we propose a nearest neighbor Gaussian process (NNGP) model to improve scaling with the number of markers and observations. To infer the parameters of our model, we develop a novel sequential Monte Carlo squared algorithm, which uses particle Gibbs with ancestor sampling to mutate the NNGP function values. The latter has a linear cost in the number of observations and the number of NNGPs, and can be applied to a broad range of NNGP models. As a case study, we analyse genetic data relating to antimalarial drug resistance in Africa, and show our scaling results empirically on a 3 and 6 genetic marker dataset.

Large-scale hypothesis testing supports probability claims about individual hypotheses, as in empirical Bayes methods for estimating local false discovery rates. We study how such claims can be interpreted as approximately calibrated forecasts of the null hypothesis, yielding interpretable error probabilities even under model misspecification. Our approach draws conceptual inspiration from probabilistic forecasting but addresses a different challenge: unlike forecasting, where labels are eventually observed, in multiple testing the ground truth is never revealed, so calibration must be assessed stochastically and established indirectly. We address this challenge by constructing a set of pseudo-labels, derived from the spacings of ordered $p$-values, which have the local false discovery rate as their regression target. Our construction unlocks existing tools for assessing and performing post-hoc calibration in multiple testing. Notably, we find on a large-scale empirical survey of published psychology and neuroscience literature that the $q$-value, a popular error measure based on the false discovery rate, can be severely miscalibrated.

Data encountered in practice are frequently contaminated by additive noise, and wavelet shrinkage remains a fundamental tool for recovering underlying signals in nonparametric estimation. Classical procedures such as hard and soft thresholding decide whether to retain a wavelet coefficient almost entirely from its magnitude. Although effective in many settings, these rules can be too rigid for coefficients whose magnitudes fall in an intermediate region where the distinction between signal and noise is uncertain. We propose MLShrink, a two-threshold wavelet denoising procedure that combines wavelet shrinkage with machine learning. Coefficients below a lower threshold are discarded, coefficients above an upper threshold are retained, and coefficients in the intermediate band are classified using local wavelet-domain features. In this way, MLShrink preserves the simplicity of classical thresholding away from the decision boundary while allowing data-adaptive decisions for ambiguous coefficients. The paper also develops a theoretical framework tailored to this architecture. We show that MLShrink is a nonexpansive support-selection rule, derive an oracle-based risk decomposition showing that excess denoising risk is determined by classification errors on the undecided band, and establish an oracle-consistency result under suitable assumptions on classifier performance. Simulation experiments on standard benchmark signals indicate that MLShrink is competitive with several established wavelet shrinkage methods and is especially effective for signals with irregular, edge-rich, or non-smooth structure. These findings suggest that learned decisions on the intermediate threshold band provide a useful and interpretable connection between classical wavelet denoising and modern statistical learning.

We introduce Symmetric CDF Oriented Probability Enhanced (SCOPE) shrinkage, a unified family of sign-preserving shrinkage rules constructed from centered cumulative distribution functions of symmetric unimodal distributions. The proposed framework generates a broad class of attenuation profiles that interpolate between strong local shrinkage near zero and asymptotically unbiased behavior in the tails. A general formulation is developed that separates scale and shape effects through two interpretable parameters, allowing effective threshold location and transition sharpness to be controlled independently. Under explicit regularity assumptions, structural properties of SCOPE shrinkage are established, including oddness, monotonicity, continuity, contractivity, and a mixture representation that connects the rules to softened thresholding operators. A Bayesian and penalized likelihood interpretation is also developed: SCOPE rules admit even penalty representations that are nondecreasing in coefficient magnitude, and suitable subclasses arise as exact maximum a posteriori estimators under proper symmetric unimodal priors. Representative examples based on logistic, uniform, and Cauchy distributions illustrate how probabilistic shape governs shrinkage behavior. Data driven parameter selection for smooth subclasses is discussed via Stein-type unbiased risk estimation. Oracle calibrated simulation studies on standard Donoho-Johnstone test functions show that SCOPE shrinkage performs competitively with several established wavelet denoising methods, while retaining a high degree of interpretability and structural flexibility. The results highlight centered distribution functions as a natural and versatile design principle for shrinkage in wavelet denoising and related estimation problems.

Factor models are popular approaches for analyzing high-dimensional data to extract low-rank signals and estimate covariances. They decompose the covariance matrix as the sum of low-rank and diagonal components. A key issue is how to choose the latent dimension $k$, which is particularly challenging when the factor model only holds approximately and in low signal-to-noise scenarios. Bayesian overfitted factor models specify an upper bound on $k$ and rely on structured shrinkage priors to effectively remove extra components. Such approaches are popular and effective, but computationally expensive. We propose a much faster \texttt{EigenBayes} approach that provides valid uncertainty quantification, based on spectral estimation of latent factors and adaptive empirical Bayes calibration of key hyperparameters. The resulting posterior distribution factorizes across outcomes and is analytically tractable, bypassing Markov chain Monte Carlo. We show that \texttt{EigenBayes} adapts to the signal-to-noise ratio of each outcome and latent dimension, while shrinking superfluous latent components to zero. We establish favorable asymptotic properties and demonstrate strong empirical performance in numerical experiments and a genomics application, where EigenBayes outperforms state-of-the-art alternatives.

Population-based biobanks, now established in many countries, offer opportunities for large-scale studies investigating the incidence of various diseases. Biobank data is typically collected from a study cohort recruited over a defined calendar period, with subjects entering the study at various ages falling between $R_L$ and $R_U$. This work focuses on biobank data that includes individuals in whom onset of the disease of interest occurred before recruitment, termed prevalent cases, along with individuals initially recruited as disease-free in whom disease onset occurred during the follow-up period. We propose a novel cumulative incidence function (CIF) estimator that goes beyond existing methods in that it incorporates all disease cases, both prevalent and incident, irrespective of their subsequent life course. In particular, the new method can handle situations involving diseases that can occur at young ages with long survival after disease onset. Asymptotic properties of the new method are established and a simulation study is presented examining the performance of the method. We illustrate the use of the method and highlight its advantages over existing methods with an application to cancer data from the UK biobank.

We study causal effect estimation with compositional treatments, where the exposure lies on a simplex and the estimand is defined over compositions rather than scalar or binary values. By considering a projection of the average potential outcome onto the treatment space, a kernel-based covariate functional balancing approach is adopted for weight construction. The weights are obtained by directly minimizing a worst-case balancing error over a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) defined on the joint space of treatments and covariates, instead of being estimated under a treatment assignment model. Building on these weights, an augmented weighted estimator (AWE) is proposed, where the outcome function is estimated via kernel ridge regression and combined with a marginal augmentation over the covariate distribution. Despite the complex structure of the resulting objective, a finite-dimensional convex optimization problem is formulated via a representer theorem and a low-rank approximation. The proposed estimator achieves $\sqrt{n}$-consistency without requiring consistent estimation or smoothness of the weights. An asymptotic normality result is established around a sample-specific target. Empirical performance is demonstrated through simulation studies and a real data application.

Organizations and researchers show increasing interest in using large language models (LLMs) in place of human participants in A/B tests, in the hope of experimenting faster and at lower cost. We study when a treatment effect estimated on LLM outcomes can recover the effect that would have been measured on the human population of interest. Distributional equivalence between LLM and human outcomes would make any standard estimator valid but is unrealistic. We therefore develop a statistical framework that adapts surrogate endpoint theory to LLMs, showing that calibrating LLM outcomes to human outcomes identifies the average treatment effect under surrogacy and comparability conditions that are jointly weaker than distributional equivalence. We present a falsification test for surrogacy and a bound on the worst-case bias from limited overlap between the LLM and human samples. We further show that the stochasticity inherent to LLMs can weaken surrogacy for identification while also introducing bias and variance during estimation, but that using an average over multiple LLM draws per unit as the surrogate mitigates these issues. Simulations validate the results, and an empirical application to A/B tests on Upworthy headlines shows that raw LLM predictions recover only 39\% of the human treatment effect while nonparametric calibration closes the gap. A central takeaway is that A/B testing on LLMs yields correct results only by assumption, whereas A/B testing on humans is correct by design, and that the required assumptions are hardest to justify precisely where A/B testing on LLMs promises the greatest benefit. We discuss the role of LLM choice, prompting, and temperature as design variables, the compounded challenge posed by long-term outcomes, and how to size human pilot studies for validation.

We introduce a novel active-learning framework for failure probability estimation in structural reliability analysis that integrates Active Kriging Monte Carlo simulation with conformal prediction. The proposed approach employs an adaptive cross-conformal strategy specifically designed for small-sample settings and kriging surrogate models using the J+GP conformal estimator. Unlike standard AK-MCS methods, the proposed framework provides distribution-free guarantees on prediction errors, leading to more reliable classification of samples near the limit-state surface. This improved uncertainty quantification enhances both the accuracy and robustness of failure probability estimates, especially for rare-event regimes where such efficiency is crucial. Reproducible numerical results illustrate the effectiveness of the method and also compare it to classical approaches on well-established benchmarks.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges for open-ended generation, as large-scale human evaluation is often expensive and difficult to scale, yet their preferences remain imperfect proxies for human judgment. Existing auditing pipelines often assume that a reliable subset of examples or clean supervision signals are available beforehand, for example from human annotation, heuristic filtering, or the outputs of strong judges. In LLM evaluation, this assumption is fragile: the initial split may inherit judge bias, while human verification is typically too scarce to define stable groups at scale. We propose AURA, an adaptive uncertainty--aware refinement framework for auditing pairwise LLM--as--a--judge decisions under selected human verification. AURA iteratively learns a human-consistency signal, propagates reliable evidence, and prioritizes uncertain comparisons for human review. The key idea is to treat trust in a judge as a latent quantity that is progressively refined as evidence accumulates. We provide a compact formulation, a stable refinement procedure, and a comprehensive evaluation on both synthetic and real pairwise LLM-answer data.

Despite the theoretical appeal of their non-reversibility, to date, no Piecewise Deterministic Markov Process (PDMP) samplers have been developed that scale better than $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{d})$ in computational complexity with respect to the target dimension $d$. We prove that this is a fundamental limitation by establishing an $Ω(\sqrt{d})$ lower bound on the algorithmic complexity of PDMP samplers in a standard setup. By relaxing the assumption that the target density must remain invariant at all continuous times, we then demonstrate how to bypass this barrier. Specifically, we introduce a novel PDMP sampling scheme and show that it achieves an empirical complexity of $\mathcal{O}(d^α)$, where $α\in [0.2, 0.3]$ for Gaussian-tailed targets. In addition, this PDMP scheme is locally adaptive in both trajectory length and distance between velocity updates.

Identification conditions describe the computability of a target query or parameter of interest as a function of the type and amount of information available. In causal identification, this information is often expressed in the form of a causal graph, and data are observed or collected for some subset of variables in the graph. Target queries may be for a single effect alone or for a class of effects in a given model. The derivation of an identification algorithm then defines mathematically the process by which the desired causal effect(s) can be uniquely determined, theoretically, in expectation. Identifiability in expectation, or 'theoretical identifiability,' generally assumes asymptotic properties, infinite data, or other mathematically idealized conditions. In this paper, we explore a fundamental distinction between this theoretical, idealized notion of identifiability and a proposed alternative that is computation-bound. The framework we propose - 'computational identifiability' - is to instead define a finite computational search procedure for an empirical estimator. If this process finds an estimator empirically, within a desired error tolerance, then identifiability is satisfied, conditional on the specified assumptions of the search (i.e., a prior distribution over the parameters) and conditional on the search procedure itself. Through several experiments, we demonstrate how this framework allows us to answer fine-grained, practical identification questions, such as identification with small finite samples, with ambiguous graphical criteria, with mixed observational-interventional data, and across counterfactual data and estimands. Code is available at https://github.com/lbynum/metadentify.

We reconcile privacy protection and rate-double-robust inference. The privacy of individuals is protected by a local privacy mechanism: injecting noise into their sensitive data, revealing only the noisy data for inference. Hence, privacy protection hinders inference. In contrast, the inference of a target parameter is rate-double-robust when the large-sample bias of an estimator of the parameter is characterised by a trade-off between the estimation errors of two other, nuisance, parameters. Hence, rate-double-robustness facilitates inference. Our starting point of reconciliation is a class of rate-double-robust target parameters indexed linearly by an infinite-dimensional and nonlinearly by a low-dimensional regression. Among others, this includes causal parameters. To infer these targets privately, we show how suitable privacy mechanisms transfer the semiparametric properties of the sensitive-data model to the private setting. Rate-double-robustness is transferred, enabling locally-private, unbiased and semiparametrically efficient inference of our target parameters. Finally, we transform general nonparametric nuisance estimators into private ones, which inherit convergence properties of their nonprivate counterparts. For parametric nuisance models, we develop a private method-of-moments estimator and its large-sample inference theory.

We study dynamic resource allocation in a multicore computing system with a fixed number of processing cores and a stream of {\it malleable} jobs. Each job may adjust its level of parallelism during execution, allowing adaptive redistribution of resources across concurrently active jobs. Jobs belong to one of two observable classes, each characterized by a distinct speed-up function with unknown parameters. The objective is to learn a core-allocation policy that minimizes the long-run mean number of jobs in the system, equivalently the mean response time in steady state. \noindent To address this uncertainty, we develop an iterative learning-and-control framework. The system alternates between estimating the unknown speed-up parameters from observed job completions and solving the associated Markov decision process (MDP) to update the allocation policy. Within each job class, cores are shared equally among active jobs; the fraction of capacity assigned to each class is obtained from the MDP formulation of \cite{berg2017}, evaluated at the current parameter estimates. We construct a maximum likelihood estimator based on state-dependent inter-departure times and prove its strong consistency under a fixed allocation policy. We further propose two learning algorithms that combine this estimation step with dynamic programming-based policy updates, and illustrate their through numerical experiments.

Active feature acquisition (AFA) sequentially selects which features to observe to reach a classification or ranking decision. Its central limitation is reliance on large amount of labeled data to fit probabilistic models guiding acquisition. Large language models (LLMs) supply unsupervised domain knowledge, but are poor sequential planners. Asking one to both know and decide conflates capabilities best kept separate. Here, we develop a framework for zero-shot AFA through disciplined elicitation: asking the LLM only for what it can be trusted to return, the unary deviations and pairwise co-variations that are the sufficient statistics of a Markov random field (MRF). We apply our framework to two settings: binary classification and top-$k$ identification. In practice, the LLM reliably returns only discriminative statistics, what distinguishes the classes rather than each class in isolation, which precludes classical AFA. We apply a maximum-entropy closure that resolves this gauge ambiguity. We evaluate on a cohort of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients, an active clinical setting where diagnostic ambiguity and patient heterogeneity obstruct stable treatment strategies. Our framework outperforms the LLM both on real labels and on its own extracted beliefs. Where it matters most, on the hardest patients, our top-$k$ acquisition policy markedly outperforms all existing methods.

In Bayesian mixture models and other exchangeable-component models, the posterior is invariant under permutation of component labels, creating m! equivalent modes-the label-switching problem. Standard MCMC methods either mix poorly across these modes or rely on post-hoc relabelling that cannot guarantee the sampler has converged. We propose Folded Transport MCMC (FolT-MCMC), which eliminates label switching before sampling by restricting the Markov chain to a fundamental domain-a sorted or reflected subspace containing exactly one representative from each symmetric mode. The proposal is a learned normalising flow whose density is symmetrised over the group orbits, ensuring correct targeting on the reduced space. We show that this construction preserves a computable convergence diagnostic based on the oscillation of the log-density ratio, and that the diagnostic becomes sharper on the fundamental domain whenever the original-space flow under-covers one or more symmetric modes. Experiments on Gaussian mixtures (d=2-20), label-switching targets (up to 24 equivalent modes), a standard Bayesian three-component mixture posterior, and real accelerometer data from a supertall building show improvement ratios of 2x to 145x, with the folded diagnostic stable across dimensions while the unfolded diagnostic collapses.

The correct inferential object in claims reserving is the conditional predictive distribution $p(R \mid \mathcal{D}, \hatθ)$, where $\mathcal{D}$ is the observed triangle held fixed. We refer to this as the conditioning principle. All existing bootstraps violate it by resampling functions of $\mathcal{D}$ inside the predictive loop, producing an $O(1)$ coverage error that does not vanish as the triangle grows. The Dirichlet-Gamma hierarchy admits a bootstrap that satisfies the principle exactly: $S^{IBNP}_i = X^{obs}_i (1-W_i)/W_i$ with $W_i \sim \mathrm{Beta}(c\hat{F}_{I-i}, c(1-\hat{F}_{I-i}))$ sampled directly from its predictive distribution. Only the allocation proportion $W_i$ is simulated; the observed triangle is held fixed. It thus inherits calibration from any development-proportion method (Chain-Ladder, Bornhuetter-Ferguson, Cape Cod, or other), making it model-agnostic. The coverage deficit is $O(I^{-1/2})$, independent of the number of development periods. Under compound Poisson data-generating processes the bootstrap is conservative for every $F_{I-i} \in (0,1)$: the predictive standard deviation analytically exceeds the true value by the factor $1/\sqrt{F_{I-i}}$. The ODP bootstrap violates the principle through two mechanisms in opposite directions: re-estimation inflates bootstrap variance under the ODP DGP, while missing accident-year frailty deflates it under frailty DGPs. The resulting coverage discrepancy is $Ω(1)$ regardless of $I$, providing a structural explanation for the cross-portfolio miscalibration heterogeneity documented by Meyers (2015). Chain-Ladder, Bornhuetter-Ferguson and Cape Cod emerge as credibility estimators under diffuse, informative and pooling priors respectively, with identical structure for counts and amounts. The concentration $c$ serves as a diagnostic: $\hat{c} < 30$ signals non-stationary development.

The Chain-Ladder (CL) method remains the dominant macro-level technique for claims reserving in non-life insurance, yet its classical formulation lacks a coherent probabilistic foundation. Existing stochastic extensions-including the Mack model and the Over-Dispersed Poisson (ODP) framework-provide measures of uncertainty but rely on second-moment assumptions or quasi-likelihood variance structures without clear generative interpretations. This paper develops a Negative Binomial Chain-Ladder (NB-CL) model that embeds the CL method within a full likelihood-based framework. The key contribution is a micro-level derivation showing that the negative binomial distribution arises naturally from a Poisson-Gamma construction: claims arrive according to a Poisson process with Gamma-distributed accident-year heterogeneity, and aggregation yields negative binomial incremental counts. This derivation gives the dispersion parameter $κ$ a structural interpretation as accident-year heterogeneity, rather than an ad-hoc overdispersion adjustment. The NB-CL model generalises the Poisson Chain-Ladder model in the limit $κ\to \infty$, shares the point estimates of the ODP model while differing in its variance function (quadratic vs. linear), and unifies the Chain-Ladder family within a single probabilistic hierarchy. A parametric bootstrap procedure is developed to incorporate both process and parameter uncertainty. Simulation studies confirm near-nominal coverage under correct specification once the dispersion parameter is bias-corrected, and a controlled degradation under model misspecification. Empirical illustrations on claim count data (Australian motor bodily injury) and paid amounts (Taylor-Ashe) document both the structural reading of $κ$ and the working-approximation status of the model in the amounts case.

We revisit size controllability results in Pötscher and Preinerstorfer (2025) concerning heteroskedasticity robust test statistics in regression models. For the special, but important, case of testing a single restriction (e.g., a zero restriction on a single coefficient), we povide a necessary and sufficient condition for size controllability, whereas the condition in Pötscher and Preinerstorfer (2025) is, in general, only sufficient (even in the case of testing a single restriction).

Designing clinical trials requires evaluating multiple operating characteristics (OCs), such as the likelihood of an early stopping decision, the probability of detecting a treatment effect, and the Type I error rate. In most cases, these evaluations are based on computationally intensive Monte Carlo simulations. As the complexity of clinical trials and the use of adaptive designs increase, the computational burden can quickly become prohibitive. We introduce a strategy for rapidly approximating OCs, called the Q-approximation. Our approach is based on quadratic approximations of the log-likelihood and asymptotic arguments. The main idea is to replace simulation of full trial datasets with simulation of the approximate likelihood functions that determine the trial's interim and final decisions. The Q-approximation approach can be applied to any trial design that uses data analysis methods coherent with the likelihood principle, including multistage designs with early stopping, adaptively randomized designs, and designs that leverage external data. We illustrate the approach with several examples and show that it provides an accurate approximation of important OCs while reducing the computation time compared to Monte Carlo simulations. In particular, in our experiments, the standard Monte Carlo approximation of OCs requires 150 to 1,900 times greater computing budget than Q-approximations to achieve comparable levels of accuracy. By enabling fast OC evaluations, Q-approximations can support the broader use of innovative trial designs in both applied trial planning and methodological development.

In this paper, we propose an invariant quantile regression (IQR) framework specifically designed for multi-environment datasets, which captures the invariance across different environments. This framework is closely related to transfer learning, causal inference, and fair machine learning, and is motivated by scenarios in which the conditional probability of the response given covariates varies, while certain key variables remain invariant. This perspective differs notably from previous works that restrict attention to the conditional mean, which is often insufficient to capture the full causal relationships between covariates and the response in heterogeneous environments. In contrast, quantile-based invariance naturally accommodates heterogeneity, and aligns more closely with structural causal models, in which variables invariant across environments at one or multiple quantile levels directly indicate potential and stable causal variables. Moreover, we show that IQR may yield a larger set of endogenous variables compared to the conditional mean framework, which in turn promotes more effective exclusion of spurious (non-causal) variables. To achieve this, we introduce a Kernel-Smoothed Invariant Quantile Regression (KS-IQR) estimator, which leverages the underlying invariance structure and heterogeneity among environments, ensuring stable estimation across multiple environments. We establish the causal discovery properties of our method, demonstrate its ability to overcome the ``curse of endogeneity'', and derive an $\ell_2$ error bound for our estimator, all in a non-asymptotic framework. We apply our method to real data for causal discovery and obtain biologically meaningful relationships, recovering known signaling pathways and revealing additional quantile-specific effects.