Papers for

machine learning practitioners

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Hierarchical clustering meets key fairness axioms that flat clustering cannot

Hierarchical Clustering Can Jointly Satisfy Richness, Consistency, and Scale Invariance

Abstract: Despite its ubiquity, clustering lacks a universally accepted definition of what is a cluster. Kleinberg's Impossibility Theorem formalizes this difficulty by showing that no flat clustering method can simultaneously satisfy three natural axioms: scale invariance, richness, and consistency. In this paper, we ask whether this impossibility persists when the output is a hierarchy rather than a single partition. We show that, in contrast to the flat clustering setting, the hierarchical analog of these axioms are jointly satisfiable. In fact, there exist uncountably many hierarchical clustering methods satisfying these axioms, which we call admissible. We explicitly construct several admissible methods, including methods based on well-separated clusters and a non-binary version of single linkage. For certain pairs of admissible methods, the hierarchy produced by one always refines that produced by the other. This refinement relation defines a partial order on the class of admissible methods. This partially ordered set has no greatest element and contains uncountably many pairwise incompatible maximal elements, revealing substantial diversity among admissible methods. Nevertheless, this diversity is constrained: every admissible method contains a hierarchy of sufficiently well-separated clusters, and every finite collection of admissible methods shares such a nontrivial common backbone.

Thu 10 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
Clustering is about grouping similar things together, but experts have shown that with simple groups it's impossible to meet three important fairness rules at the same time. This paper shows that when you use hierarchical clustering, which organizes groups within groups, it is possible to satisfy all three rules together. The authors also build different methods that follow these rules and show there are many diverse ways to do this while sharing some common structure. This expands our understanding of how to fairly organize complex data.
Open 2609.11173v1

Oracle complexity bounds for computing approximate fixed points with noise

Oracle Complexity of Stochastic Fixed-Point Equations with Nonexpansive Maps

Abstract: We study the oracle complexity of computing a point with small fixed-point residual $\|T(x)-x\| \leq ε$, for a general norm $\|\cdot\|$ and a self-map $T$ of a compact convex set. We study this problem in the setting where $T$ is nonexpansive with respect to the same norm $\|\cdot\|$ and accessed via an unbiased stochastic oracle with bounded variance $σ^2$. We provide an algorithm that solves such instances for any norm with a weak Rademacher type $q > 1$, with high probability. The algorithm is based on a recursive anchoring technique. For type-$2$ spaces, such as $\ell_p$-spaces for $p \in [2, \infty]$, our algorithm attains stochastic oracle complexity $\tilde O(σ^2 ε^{-3} + ε^{-1})$. We further prove a near-matching lower bound (i.e., matching up to poly-log factors) for such $\ell_{\infty}$-norm instances in high dimensions. Our lower bound holds against any randomized algorithm that succeeds with constant probability. It further extends to settings with ``sparse'' noise, where variance measured with respect to any $\ell_p$ norm is of the same order, ruling out the possibility of improving oracle complexity as a function of $\varepsilon$ by measuring variance in a non-matching $\ell_p$ norm.

Tue 8 SeptData Structures and AlgorithmsMachine Learning
The gist
This paper studies how hard it is to find approximate fixed points of certain mathematical functions when the function can only be queried with some randomness or noise. The authors provide an efficient algorithm that uses noisy information to find points that nearly satisfy the fixed-point condition, with guarantees on how many queries it needs. They also prove that no algorithm can do significantly better in some common settings, showing their algorithm is nearly optimal. Their results work in general mathematical spaces and cover different ways of measuring errors and noise.
Open 2609.09524v1

Machine learning reveals matter density from galaxy motions and positions

Inductive Biases in Field-Level Cosmological Inference from Galaxy Catalogs

Abstract: We perform field-level likelihood-free inference of the matter density parameter $Ω_m$ from simulated galaxy catalogs using machine learning models with differing inductive biases. Using hydrodynamic simulations from CAMELS, we examine how observable choice and architecture govern cosmological information extraction. We consider galaxy positions and line-of-sight peculiar velocities, separately and jointly, and compare permutation-invariant Deep Sets, implemented with either multilayer perceptrons (MLPs) or Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks (KANs), to graph neural networks (GNNs), which explicitly encode spatial relations. We test in-distribution and out-of-distribution (OOD) performance across simulations with different subgrid galaxy-formation prescriptions. Deep Sets infer $Ω_m$ from velocities alone with mean relative errors of approximately $18\%$ in-distribution and $\sim25\%$ OOD, with KANs and MLPs achieving comparable performance. In contrast, the same set-based approach does not yield useful $σ_8$ predictions in either in-distribution or cross-suite tests. Adding positions does not improve Deep Sets, while GNNs infer $Ω_m$ with mean relative errors of about $10\%$ in-distribution and $10$--$17\%$ OOD. These results indicate that peculiar velocities provide the dominant source of $Ω_m$ information for set-based models in this setting, while spatial information is most effectively used by architectures that explicitly encode galaxy-galaxy relations. Because the velocity inputs are exact simulated peculiar velocities, applications to survey data will require validation under realistic velocity-measurement noise, selection effects, and survey geometry.

Tue 8 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
Measuring how much matter is in the universe is a big challenge. This paper shows how different machine learning methods can estimate the universe’s matter density by looking at where galaxies are and how they move. Models that focus on galaxy velocities do pretty well, especially when using methods that consider relationships between galaxies. However, using galaxy data to predict other cosmic properties remains difficult. The authors also highlight that real observations need more testing because simulated galaxy motions are exact, unlike noisy data from telescopes.
Open 2609.09504v1

PAC Bayesian error bounds improve learning of noisy linear dynamical systems

PAC-Bayesian Bounds for Learning Partially Observed Stochastic Linear Time-Invariant State-Space Systems with Inputs and Sub-Gaussian Noise

Abstract: In this paper we derive a Probably Approximately Correct (PAC)-Bayesian error bound for partially observed linear time-invariant (LTI) stochastic dynamical systems in state-space form with inputs and sub-Gaussian noise. Such bounds are widespread in machine learning, and they are useful for characterizing the predictive power of models learned from finitely many data points. The bound derived in this paper relates the expectation of prediction errors with the prediction error generated by the model on the data used for learning. In addition, we show that it can also be used to derive bounds for the parameter estimation error. In turn, this allows us to provide finite-sample error bounds for the prediction error and parameter estimation error for a wide class of system identification algorithms. Furthermore, as LTI systems are a sub-class of recurrent neural networks (RNNs), these error bounds could be a first step towards PAC-Bayesian bounds for RNNs.

Tue 8 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
Predicting how systems change over time can be hard when you can only see part of the system and measurements have noise. The authors derived a way to estimate how accurate predictions will be after learning from limited noisy data. Their approach links the average error on new data to the error on the data used for learning, helping to understand and limit mistakes. This also helps measure how well the underlying system parameters are learned. Since linear time-invariant systems are a simple kind of recurrent neural network, this work could help develop error bounds for more complex models too.
Open 2609.08740v1

Rank equivalence found in multi-dimensional symmetric tensor factorization

Equivalence of Fixed-Rank and Rank-One Even-Order Symmetric Tensor Factorization

Abstract: In the recent work of Barbier, Ko, and the second present author on sublinear-rank symmetric matrix factorization [Math. Stat. Learn. 9 (2026), 1-68], a key result is that, in the Bayes-optimal setting, the large-size limit of the free entropy of the finite-rank spiked Wigner model is the same as in the rank-one case when the signal has centered i.i.d. entries. In this paper, we show that this rank-one equivalence result extends to the case of finite-rank, even-order, symmetric tensor factorization. Moreover, we give a natural reformulation of a hypothesis that was stated in the aforementioned work to be necessary for this result. As in the matrix case, we use information-theoretic identities and replica symmetry to reduce a known multi-dimensional variational formula for the limiting free entropy to its one-dimensional analog. The novelty stems from the fact that said formula involves a replica symmetric potential containing Hadamard (entrywise) powers, rather than squares, of the matrix-valued variational parameter, so the eigenvalue-based approach used in the matrix case must be adjusted.

Mon 7 SeptInformation Theory
The gist
Factoring complex data structures called tensors can be hard, especially when they have many dimensions. The authors show that breaking down even-order symmetric tensors of finite rank is fundamentally the same as breaking down rank-one tensors in certain statistical settings. They extend previous math results from matrices to these more complex shapes. This finding simplifies understanding of tensor factorization by reducing complex multi-dimensional problems to simpler one-dimensional ones.
Open 2609.06971v1