arXiv subjects

Lezhi Tan

Publications and source records attributed to Lezhi Tan.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Valid Inference with Synthetic Data via Task Exchangeability

There is a proliferation of work arguing for the use of synthetic data in scientific research. For example, social scientists are arguing for the use of LLM-generated "silicon samples" in pilot studies; AI evaluations increasingly rely on "LLM-as-a-judge" outputs; and proteomics research is accelerated by generative models that produce synthetic protein structures. These developments raise an intriguing possibility: synthetic data may help researchers ask more questions, run more studies, and accelerate discovery. But they also raise a fundamental concern: synthetic data can be biased, noisy, and misspecified. In this work, we propose statistical principles for using synthetic data in scientific research with provable validity guarantees. The key insight is a new technical condition that we call task exchangeability. Informally, this is a requirement that the researcher can identify historical tasks, for which real data is available, such that their current task of interest is exchangeable with the historical tasks in an appropriate mathematical sense. We develop methods for valid inference under task exchangeability, together with extensions that provide guarantees even beyond exchangeability. We demonstrate the framework on public opinion surveys with silicon samples and AI evaluation with autoraters.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

When Should Humans Step In? Optimal Human Dispatching in AI-Assisted Decisions

AI systems increasingly assist human decision making by producing preliminary assessments of complex inputs. However, such AI-generated assessments can often be noisy or systematically biased, raising a central question: how should costly human effort be allocated to correct AI outputs where it matters the most for the final decision? We propose a general decision-theoretic framework for human-AI collaboration in which AI assessments are treated as factor-level signals and human judgments as costly information that can be selectively acquired. We consider cases where the optimal selection problem reduces to maximizing a reward associated with each candidate subset of factors, and turn policy design into reward estimation. We develop estimation procedures under both nonparametric and linear models, covering contextual and non-contextual selection rules. In the linear setting, the optimal rule admits a closed-form expression with a clear interpretation in terms of factor importance and residual variance. We apply our framework to AI-assisted peer review. Our approach substantially outperforms LLM-only predictions and achieves performance comparable to full human review while using only 20-30% of the human information. Across different selection rules, we find that simpler rules derived under linear models can significantly reduce computational cost without harming final prediction performance. Our results highlight both the value of human intervention and the efficiency of principled dispatching.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2026

Epsilon-Minimax Solutions of Statistical Decision Problems

A decision rule is epsilon-minimax if it is minimax up to an additive factor epsilon. We present an algorithm for provably obtaining epsilon-minimax solutions for a class of statistical decision problems. In particular, we are interested in problems where the statistician chooses randomly among I decision rules. The minimax solution of these problems admits a convex programming representation over the (I-1)-simplex. Our suggested algorithm is a well-known mirror subgradient descent routine, designed to approximately solve the convex optimization problem that defines the minimax decision rule. This iterative routine is known in the computer science literature as the hedge algorithm and is used in algorithmic game theory as a practical tool to find approximate solutions of two-person zero-sum games. We apply the suggested algorithm to different minimax problems in the econometrics literature. An empirical application to the problem of optimally selecting sites to maximize the external validity of an experimental policy evaluation illustrates the usefulness of the suggested procedure.

econ.EM↗

arXiv2025

Approximate Least-Favorable Distributions and Nearly Optimal Tests via Stochastic Mirror Descent

We consider a class of hypothesis testing problems where the null hypothesis postulates $M$ distributions for the observed data, and there is only one possible distribution under the alternative. We show that one can use a stochastic mirror descent routine for convex optimization to provably obtain - after finitely many iterations - both an approximate least-favorable distribution and a nearly optimal test, in a sense we make precise. Our theoretical results yield concrete recommendations about the algorithm's implementation, including its initial condition, its step size, and the number of iterations. Importantly, our suggested algorithm can be viewed as a slight variation of the algorithm suggested by Elliott, Müller, and Watson (2015), whose theoretical performance guarantees are unknown.

econ.EM↗

arXiv2025

Accelerate Langevin Sampling with Birth-Death Process and Exploration Component

Sampling a probability distribution with known likelihood is a fundamental task in computational science and engineering. Aiming at multimodality, we propose a new sampling method that takes advantage of both birth-death process and exploration component. The main idea of this method is look before you leap. We keep two sets of samplers, one at warmer temperature and one at original temperature. The former one serves as pioneer in exploring new modes and passing useful information to the other, while the latter one samples the target distribution after receiving the information. We derive a mean-field limit and show how the exploration component accelerates the sampling process. Moreover, we prove exponential asymptotic convergence under mild assumption. Finally, we test on experiments from previous literature and compare our methodology to previous ones.

stat.CO↗