SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Erwan Scornet

Publications and source records attributed to Erwan Scornet.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Increasing Missingness to Reduce Bias: Richardson-SGD with Missing Data

Stochastic gradient methods are central to modern large-scale learning, but their use with incomplete covariates remains delicate since imputation schemes generally introduce systematic gradient biases, as shown for linear models. In this work, we prove that all parametric models exhibit similar gradient bias for various imputation procedures and characterize exactly the dependence on the missingness ratio vector $p$, with $O(\|p\|)$ as the leading term. We exploit this analysis to propose a simple debiasing procedure for stochastic gradient descent (SGD) with missing values based on Richardson extrapolation, which leverages the exact expression of the gradient bias. The key idea is to \emph{deliberately add missingness}: from an already incomplete observation, we generate a further-thinned version at a higher, controlled missingness level, and combine the two resulting stochastic gradients to cancel the leading bias term. We prove that one Richardson step reduces the gradient bias from $O(\|p\|)$ to $O(\|p\|^2)$ under several missingness scenarios. Our proposed method is computationally efficient, model-agnostic and applies to any parametric loss whose stochastic gradient can be computed after imputation. Furthermore, when missing indicators are independent, the population gradient bias is a multilinear polynomial in $p$ and depends only on population gradient errors induced by declaring a single coordinate missing. In this case, our method generalizes to a multi-step Richardson procedure which recursively cancels higher-order terms. Empirically, Richardson debiasing improves optimization and estimation across several generalized linear models and combines positively with widely used imputation procedures such as MICE. These results suggest that, somewhat counter-intuitively, adding controlled missingness on top of existing missing data can make stochastic learning from incomplete data more accurate.

stat.ML

Principled Federated Random Forests for Heterogeneous Data

Random Forests (RF) are among the most powerful and widely used predictive models for centralized tabular data, yet few methods exist to adapt them to the federated learning setting. Unlike most federated learning approaches, the piecewise-constant nature of RF prevents exact gradient-based optimization. As a result, existing federated RF implementations rely on unprincipled heuristics: for instance, aggregating decision trees trained independently on clients fails to optimize the global impurity criterion, even under simple distribution shifts. We propose FedForest, a new federated RF algorithm for horizontally partitioned data that naturally accommodates diverse forms of client data heterogeneity, from covariate shift to more complex outcome shift mechanisms. We prove that our splitting procedure, based on aggregating carefully chosen client statistics, closely approximates the split selected by a centralized algorithm. Moreover, FedForest allows splits on client indicators, enabling a non-parametric form of personalization that is absent from prior federated random forest methods. Empirically, we demonstrate that the resulting federated forests closely match centralized performance across heterogeneous benchmarks while remaining communication-efficient.

stat.ML

When Pattern-by-Pattern Works: Theoretical and Empirical Insights for Logistic Models with Missing Values

Predicting with missing inputs challenges even parametric models, as parameter estimation alone is insufficient for prediction on incomplete data. While several works study prediction in linear models, we focus on logistic models, where optimal predictors lack closed-form expressions. We prove that a Pattern-by-Pattern strategy (PbP), which learns one logistic model per missingness pattern, accurately approximates Bayes probabilities under a Gaussian Pattern Mixture Model (GPMM). Crucially, this result holds across standard missing data scenarios (MCAR and MAR) and, notably, in Missing Not at Random (MNAR) settings where standard methods often fail. Empirically, we compare PbP against imputation and EM methods across classification, probability estimation, calibration, and inference. Our analysis provides a comprehensive view of logistic regression with missing values. It reveals that mean imputation can be used as baseline for low sample sizes and PbP for large sample sizes, as both methods are fast to train and may have good performances in some settings. The best performances are achieved by non-linear multiple iterative imputation techniques that include the response label (Random Forest MICE with response), which are more computationally expensive.

stat.ML

Privacy Amplification by Missing Data

Privacy preservation is a fundamental requirement in many high-stakes domains such as medicine and finance, where sensitive personal data must be analyzed without compromising individual confidentiality. At the same time, these applications often involve datasets with missing values due to non-response, data corruption, or deliberate anonymization. Missing data is traditionally viewed as a limitation because it reduces the information available to analysts and can degrade model performance. In this work, we take an alternative perspective and study missing data from a privacy preservation standpoint. Intuitively, when features are missing, less information is revealed about individuals, suggesting that missingness could inherently enhance privacy. We formalize this intuition by analyzing missing data as a privacy amplification mechanism within the framework of differential privacy. We show, for the first time, that incomplete data can yield privacy amplification for differentially private algorithms.

stat.ML

What Is a Good Imputation Under MAR Missingness?

Missing values pose a persistent challenge in modern data science. Consequently, there is an ever-growing number of publications introducing new imputation methods in various fields. The present paper attempts to take a step back and provide a more systematic analysis. Starting from an in-depth discussion of the Missing at Random (MAR) condition for nonparametric imputation, we first investigate whether the widely used fully conditional specification (FCS) approach indeed identifies the correct conditional distributions. Based on this analysis, we propose three essential properties an ideal imputation method should meet, thus enabling a more principled evaluation of existing methods and more targeted development of new methods. In particular, we introduce a new imputation method, denoted mice-DRF, that meets two out of the three criteria. We also discuss ways to compare imputation methods, based on distributional distances. Finally, numerical experiments illustrate the points made in this discussion.

math.ST

Risk ratio, odds ratio, risk difference... Which causal measure is easier to generalize?

There are many measures to report so-called treatment or causal effects: absolute difference, ratio, odds ratio, number needed to treat, and so on. The choice of a measure, e.g. absolute versus relative, is often debated because it leads to different impressions of the benefit or risk of a treatment. Besides, different causal measures may lead to various treatment effect heterogeneity: some input variables may have an influence on some causal measures and no effect at all on others. In addition some measures -- but not all -- have appealing properties such as collapsibility, matching the intuition of a population summary. In this paper, we first review common causal measures and their pros and cons typically brought forward. Doing so, we clarify the notions of collapsibility and treatment effect heterogeneity, unifying existing definitions. Then, we show that for any causal measures there exists a discriminative model such that the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) captures the treatment effect. However, only the risk difference has its CATE and ATE (average treatment effect) disentangled from the baseline, regardless of the outcome type (continuous or binary). As our primary goal is the generalization of causal measures, we show that different sets of covariates are needed to generalize an effect to a target population depending on (i) the causal measure of interest, and (ii) the identification method chosen, that is generalizing either conditional outcome or local effects.

stat.ME

How to rank imputation methods?

Imputation is an attractive tool for dealing with the widespread issue of missing values. Consequently, studying and developing imputation methods has been an active field of research over the last decade. Faced with an imputation task and a large number of methods, how does one find the most suitable imputation? Although model selection in different contexts, such as prediction, has been well studied, this question appears not to have received much attention. In this paper, we follow the concept of Imputation Scores (I-Scores) and develop a new, reliable, and easy-to-implement score to rank missing value imputations for a given data set without access to the complete data. In practice, this is usually done by artificially masking observations to compare imputed to observed values using measures such as the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE). We discuss how this approach of additionally masking observations can be misleading if not done carefully and that it is generally not valid under MAR. We then identify a new missingness assumption and develop a score that combines a sensible masking of observations with proper scoring rules. As such the ranking is geared towards the imputation that best replicates the distribution of the data, allowing to find imputations that are suitable for a range of downstream tasks. We show the propriety of the score and discuss an estimation algorithm involving energy scores. Finally, we show the efficacy of the new score in simulated data examples, as well as a downstream task.

stat.ME

Quantifying Treatment Effects: Estimating Risk Ratios in Causal Inference

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) are the current gold standards to empirically measure the effect of a new drug. However, they may be of limited size and resorting to complementary non-randomized data, referred to as observational, is promising, as additional sources of evidence. In both RCT and observational data, the Risk Difference (RD) is often used to characterize the effect of a drug. Additionally, medical guidelines recommend to also report the Risk Ratio (RR), which may provide a different comprehension of the effect of the same drug. While different methods have been proposed and studied to estimate the RD, few methods exist to estimate the RR. In this paper, we propose estimators of the RR both in RCT and observational data and provide both asymptotical and finite-sample analyses. We show that, even in an RCT, estimating treatment allocation probability or adjusting for covariates leads to lower asymptotic variance. In observational studies, we propose weighting and outcome modeling estimators and derive their asymptotic bias and variance for well-specified models. Using semi-parametric theory, we define two doubly robusts estimators with minimal variances among unbiased estimators. We support our theoretical analysis with empirical evaluations and illustrate our findings through experiments.

stat.ME

Asymptotic Normality of Infinite Centered Random Forests -Application to Imbalanced Classification

Many classification tasks involve imbalanced data, in which a class is largely underrepresented. Several techniques consists in creating a rebalanced dataset on which a classifier is trained. In this paper, we study theoretically such a procedure, when the classifier is a Centered Random Forests (CRF). We establish a Central Limit Theorem (CLT) on the infinite CRF with explicit rates and exact constant. We then prove that the CRF trained on the rebalanced dataset exhibits a bias, which can be removed with appropriate techniques. Based on an importance sampling (IS) approach, the resulting debiased estimator, called IS-ICRF, satisfies a CLT centered at the prediction function value. For high imbalance settings, we prove that the IS-ICRF estimator enjoys a variance reduction compared to the ICRF trained on the original data. Therefore, our theoretical analysis highlights the benefits of training random forests on a rebalanced dataset (followed by a debiasing procedure) compared to using the original data. Our theoretical results, especially the variance rates and the variance reduction, appear to be valid for Breiman's random forests in our experiments.

stat.ML

Causal Meta-Analysis: Rethinking the Foundations of Evidence-Based Medicine

Meta-analysis, by synthesizing effect estimates from multiple studies conducted in diverse settings, stands at the top of the evidence hierarchy in clinical research. Yet, conventional approaches based on fixed- or random-effects models lack a causal framework, which may limit their interpretability and utility for public policy. Incorporating causal inference reframes meta-analysis as the estimation of well-defined causal effects on clearly specified populations, enabling a principled approach to handling study heterogeneity. We show that classical meta-analysis estimators have a clear causal interpretation when effects are measured as risk differences. However, this breaks down for nonlinear measures like the risk ratio and odds ratio. To address this, we introduce novel causal aggregation formulas that remain compatible with standard meta-analysis practices and do not require access to individual-level data. To evaluate real-world impact, we apply both classical and causal meta-analysis methods to 500 published meta-analyses. While the conclusions often align, notable discrepancies emerge, revealing cases where conventional methods may suggest a treatment is beneficial when, under a causal lens, it is in fact harmful.

stat.ME

A Unified Framework for the Transportability of Population-Level Causal Measures

Generalization methods offer a powerful solution to one of the key drawbacks of randomized controlled trials (RCTs): their limited representativeness. By enabling the transport of treatment effect estimates to target populations subject to distributional shifts, these methods are increasingly recognized as the future of meta-analysis, the current gold standard in evidence-based medicine. Yet most existing approaches focus on the risk difference, overlooking the diverse range of causal measures routinely reported in clinical research. Reporting multiple effect measures-both absolute (e.g., risk difference, number needed to treat) and relative (e.g., risk ratio, odds ratio)-is essential to ensure clinical relevance, policy utility, and interpretability across contexts. To address this gap, we propose a unified framework for transporting a broad class of first-moment population causal effect measures under covariate shift. We provide identification results under two conditional exchangeability assumptions, derive both classical and semiparametric estimators, and evaluate their performance through theoretical analysis, simulations, and real-world applications. Our analysis shows the specificity of different causal measures and thus the interest of studying them all: for instance, two common approaches (one-step, estimating equation) lead to similar estimators for the risk difference but to two distinct estimators for the odds ratio.

stat.ME

Harnessing Mixed Features for Imbalance Data Oversampling: Application to Bank Customers Scoring

This study investigates rare event detection on tabular data within binary classification. Standard techniques to handle class imbalance include SMOTE, which generates synthetic samples from the minority class. However, SMOTE is intrinsically designed for continuous input variables. In fact, despite SMOTE-NC-its default extension to handle mixed features (continuous and categorical variables)-very few works propose procedures to synthesize mixed features. On the other hand, many real-world classification tasks, such as in banking sector, deal with mixed features, which have a significant impact on predictive performances. To this purpose, we introduce MGS-GRF, an oversampling strategy designed for mixed features. This method uses a kernel density estimator with locally estimated full-rank covariances to generate continuous features, while categorical ones are drawn from the original samples through a generalized random forest. Empirically, contrary to SMOTE-NC, we show that MGS-GRF exhibits two important properties: (i) the coherence i.e. the ability to only generate combinations of categorical features that are already present in the original dataset and (ii) association, i.e. the ability to preserve the dependence between continuous and categorical features. We also evaluate the predictive performances of LightGBM classifiers trained on data sets, augmented with synthetic samples from various strategies. Our comparison is performed on simulated and public real-world data sets, as well as on a private data set from a leading financial institution. We observe that synthetic procedures that have the properties of coherence and association display better predictive performances in terms of various predictive metrics (PR and ROC AUC...), with MGS-GRF being the best one. Furthermore, our method exhibits promising results for the private banking application, with development pipeline being compliant with regulatory constraints.

cs.LG

A primer on linear classification with missing data

Supervised learning with missing data aims at building the best prediction of a target output based on partially-observed inputs. Major approaches to address this problem can be decomposed into $(i)$ impute-then-predict strategies, which first fill in the empty input components and then apply a unique predictor and $(ii)$ Pattern-by-Pattern (P-b-P) approaches, where a predictor is built on each missing pattern. In this paper, we theoretically analyze how three classical linear classifiers, namely perceptron, logistic regression and linear discriminant analysis (LDA), behave with Missing Completely At Random (MCAR) data, depending on the strategy (imputation or P-b-P) used to handle missing values. We prove that both imputation and P-b-P approaches are ill-specified in a logistic regression framework, thus questioning the relevance of such approaches to handle missing data. The most favorable auspices to perform classification with missing data concern P-b-P LDA methods. We provide finite-sample bounds for the excess risk in this framework, even for high-dimensional or MNAR settings. Experiments illustrate our theoretical findings.

math.ST

On the consistency of supervised learning with missing values

In many application settings, the data have missing entries which make analysis challenging. An abundant literature addresses missing values in an inferential framework: estimating parameters and their variance from incomplete tables. Here, we consider supervised-learning settings: predicting a target when missing values appear in both training and testing data. We show the consistency of two approaches in prediction. A striking result is that the widely-used method of imputing with a constant, such as the mean prior to learning is consistent when missing values are not informative. This contrasts with inferential settings where mean imputation is pointed at for distorting the distribution of the data. That such a simple approach can be consistent is important in practice. We also show that a predictor suited for complete observations can predict optimally on incomplete data, through multiple imputation. Finally, to compare imputation with learning directly with a model that accounts for missing values, we analyze further decision trees. These can naturally tackle empirical risk minimization with missing values, due to their ability to handle the half-discrete nature of incomplete variables. After comparing theoretically and empirically different missing values strategies in trees, we recommend using the "missing incorporated in attribute" method as it can handle both non-informative and informative missing values.

stat.ML

Reweighting the RCT for generalization: finite sample error and variable selection

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) may suffer from limited scope. In particular, samples may be unrepresentative: some RCTs over- or under- sample individuals with certain characteristics compared to the target population, for which one wants conclusions on treatment effectiveness. Re-weighting trial individuals to match the target population can improve the treatment effect estimation. In this work, we establish the exact expressions of the bias and variance of such reweighting procedures -- also called Inverse Propensity of Sampling Weighting (IPSW) -- in presence of categorical covariates for any sample size. Such results allow us to compare the theoretical performance of different versions of IPSW estimates. Besides, our results show how the performance (bias, variance, and quadratic risk) of IPSW estimates depends on the two sample sizes (RCT and target population). A by-product of our work is the proof of consistency of IPSW estimates. Results also reveal that IPSW performances are improved when the trial probability to be treated is estimated (rather than using its oracle counterpart). In addition, we study choice of variables: how including covariates that are not necessary for identifiability of the causal effect may impact the asymptotic variance. Including covariates that are shifted between the two samples but not treatment effect modifiers increases the variance while non-shifted but treatment effect modifiers do not. We illustrate all the takeaways in a didactic example, and on a semi-synthetic simulation inspired from critical care medicine.

stat.ME

Do we need rebalancing strategies? A theoretical and empirical study around SMOTE and its variants

Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique (SMOTE) is a common rebalancing strategy for handling imbalanced tabular data sets. However, few works analyze SMOTE theoretically. In this paper, we derive several non-asymptotic upper bound on SMOTE density. From these results, we prove that SMOTE (with default parameter) tends to copy the original minority samples asymptotically. We confirm and illustrate empirically this first theoretical behavior on a real-world data-set.bFurthermore, we prove that SMOTE density vanishes near the boundary of the support of the minority class distribution. We then adapt SMOTE based on our theoretical findings to introduce two new variants. These strategies are compared on 13 tabular data sets with 10 state-of-the-art rebalancing procedures, including deep generative and diffusion models. One of our key findings is that, for most data sets, applying no rebalancing strategy is competitive in terms of predictive performances, would it be with LightGBM, tuned random forests or logistic regression. However, when the imbalance ratio is artificially augmented, one of our two modifications of SMOTE leads to promising predictive performances compared to SMOTE and other state-of-the-art strategies.

stat.ML

Random features models: a way to study the success of naive imputation

Constant (naive) imputation is still widely used in practice as this is a first easy-to-use technique to deal with missing data. Yet, this simple method could be expected to induce a large bias for prediction purposes, as the imputed input may strongly differ from the true underlying data. However, recent works suggest that this bias is low in the context of high-dimensional linear predictors when data is supposed to be missing completely at random (MCAR). This paper completes the picture for linear predictors by confirming the intuition that the bias is negligible and that surprisingly naive imputation also remains relevant in very low dimension.To this aim, we consider a unique underlying random features model, which offers a rigorous framework for studying predictive performances, whilst the dimension of the observed features varies.Building on these theoretical results, we establish finite-sample bounds on stochastic gradient (SGD) predictors applied to zero-imputed data, a strategy particularly well suited for large-scale learning.If the MCAR assumption appears to be strong, we show that similar favorable behaviors occur for more complex missing data scenarios.

math.ST

Is interpolation benign for random forest regression?

Statistical wisdom suggests that very complex models, interpolating training data, will be poor at predicting unseen examples.Yet, this aphorism has been recently challenged by the identification of benign overfitting regimes, specially studied in the case of parametric models: generalization capabilities may be preserved despite model high complexity.While it is widely known that fully-grown decision trees interpolate and, in turn, have bad predictive performances, the same behavior is yet to be analyzed for Random Forests (RF).In this paper, we study the trade-off between interpolation and consistency for several types of RF algorithms. Theoretically, we prove that interpolation regimes and consistency cannot be achieved simultaneously for several non-adaptive RF.Since adaptivity seems to be the cornerstone to bring together interpolation and consistency, we study interpolating Median RF which are proved to be consistent in the interpolating regime. This is the first result conciliating interpolation and consistency for RF, highlighting that the averaging effect introduced by feature randomization is a key mechanism, sufficient to ensure the consistency in the interpolation regime and beyond.Numerical experiments show that Breiman's RF are consistent while exactly interpolating, when no bootstrap step is involved.We theoretically control the size of the interpolation area, which converges fast enough to zero, giving a necessary condition for exact interpolation and consistency to occur in conjunction.

math.ST