Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Lorenzo Masoero

Publications and source records attributed to Lorenzo Masoero.

17 recordsLinked to original sources

Online activity prediction via generalized Indian buffet process models

Online A/B tests are the standard tool for data-driven decision-making at scale. Among the design choices with the largest impact on statistical power is the triggering mechanism: how many users to expose and for how long. This often requires forecasting user engagement, i.e., whether enough users will trigger, and when a target participation level will be reached, from limited pilot data. We introduce a Bayesian nonparametric model for predicting both new-user counts and total triggers, accommodating the heavy-tailed engagement patterns typical of web experiments. All predictive quantities can be computed without intensive numerical procedures such as Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) or variational inference. We evaluate on three public datasets (over 450 public benchmark evaluations) and a proprietary benchmark drawn from 759 production A/B tests comprising 1,774 arms. Across the benchmark analyses, our models are competitive and frequently improve accuracy in forecasting new users, total triggers, and time to reach a target sample size compared with state-of-the-art competitors, especially when only a few pilot days are observed.

stat.AP↗

Can AI Agents Simulate A/B Test Outcomes? A Validation Framework for Agentic Experimentation

A/B testing remains the standard for rolling out new features in the technology industry. Each experiment, however, consumes real traffic, engineering effort, and weeks of wall-clock time. Can AI agents---conditioned on behavioral profiles and contextual descriptions of the intervention---simulate outcomes accurately enough to vet candidate treatments before committing live traffic? We formalize this question as a \emph{Simulated Randomized Controlled Trial} (S-RCT) and derive a two-layer error decomposition that separates agent approximation error from subsampling error, enabling targeted improvements to each. The framework is agent-agnostic: any behavioral model---from a fine-tuned specialist to a general-purpose foundation model---can serve as the simulation engine. Validated on 67 historical marketing A/B tests, a baseline S-RCT using an off-the-shelf foundation model captures directional signal (sign overlap 0.70) but systematically overshoots effect magnitudes. A two-phase pre-period calibration protocol reduces the squared prediction error (after removing irreducible measurement noise) by ${\sim}77\times$; a within-subject design---where each agent is exposed to both arms---reduces standard errors by ${\sim}2.4\times$. We discuss limitations of the current approach and identify applications where experimenters stand to benefit from agentic signals.

cs.CL↗

Demonstration Experiments

Adaptive experiments are used extensively in online platforms, healthcare and biotechnology, and the social sciences. Often, the primary goal is not to precisely estimate a treatment effect but to demonstrate that at least one candidate intervention yields a positive effect, for some subpopulation and on some measured outcome. We formalize this objective as testing the global null in a threshold bandit framework, and develop two inference procedures that are valid under general adaptive sampling: one that pools information across promising arms, and one based on time-uniform multiple testing of individual arm means. To support the latter, we establish a moderate-deviations principle for the sequential $t$-statistic, justifying asymptotic confidence sequences in settings where the number of arms is large relative to the sample size. To illustrate how adaptive designs can target the proposed statistics, we recast experimental design as bandit optimization with an arm's reward given by its signal-to-noise ratio, and analyze an allocation rule for which we establish a logarithmic regret bound. We apply the methods in a simulation study of targeting unconditional cash transfer programs.

math.ST↗

Regression Adjustments for Double Randomization in Two-Sided Marketplaces

Multiple randomization designs (MRDs) are a class of experimental designs used to handle interference in two-sided marketplaces. We investigate regression adjustment strategies for estimating total, spillover, and direct effects in MRDs. We derive minimum asymptotic variance estimators among a broad class of linearly adjusted estimators, without assuming a linear model on the potential outcomes. Surprisingly, the optimal regression adjustments are estimable from data and are generally different from regression adjustments in classical randomized experiments. For example, one such optimal estimator for the direct effect corresponds to a weighted regression with interacted two-way fixed effects. We establish model-robustness properties, central limit theorems, and inferential methods for our estimators, relying on improved theoretical results for MRD experiments. Our results provide the analog of classical regression adjustments for marketplace experiments. Numerical simulations demonstrate a considerable increase in efficiency over simpler approaches, enabling better inference when running MRDs.

stat.ME↗

Multiple Randomization Designs: Estimation and Inference with Interference

Classical designs of randomized experiments, going back to Fisher and Neyman in the 1930s still dominate practice even in online experimentation. However, such designs are of limited value for answering standard questions in settings, common in marketplaces, where multiple populations of agents interact strategically, leading to complex patterns of spillover effects. In this paper, we discuss new experimental designs and corresponding estimands to account for and capture these complex spillovers. We derive the finite-sample properties of tractable estimators for main effects, direct effects, and spillovers, and present associated central limit theorems.

stat.ME↗

Multiple Randomization Designs: Estimation and Inference with Interference

Completely randomized experiments, originally developed by Fisher and Neyman in the 1930s, are still widely used in practice, even in online experimentation. However, such designs are of limited value for answering standard questions in marketplaces, where multiple populations of agents interact strategically, leading to complex patterns of spillover effects. In this paper, we derive the finite-sample properties of tractable estimators for "Simple Multiple Randomization Designs" (SMRDs), a new class of experimental designs which account for complex spillover effects in randomized experiments. Our derivations are obtained under a natural and general form of cross-unit interference, which we call "local interference". We discuss the estimation of main effects, direct effects, and spillovers, and present associated central limit theorems.

stat.ME↗

Robust and efficient multiple-unit switchback experimentation

User-randomized A/B testing has emerged as the gold standard for online experimentation. However, when this kind of approach is not feasible due to legal, ethical or practical considerations, experimenters have to consider alternatives like item-randomization. Item-randomization is often met with skepticism due to its poor empirical performance. To fill this gap, in this paper we introduce a novel and rich class of experimental designs, "Regular Balanced Switchback Designs" (RBSDs). At their core, RBSDs work by randomly changing treatment assignments over both time and items. After establishing the properties of our designs in a potential outcomes framework, characterizing assumptions and conditions under which corresponding estimators are resilient to the presence of carryover effects, we show empirically via both realistic simulations and real e-commerce data that RBSDs systematically outperform standard item-randomized and non-balanced switchback approaches by yielding much more accurate estimates of the causal effects of interest without incurring any additional bias.

stat.ME↗

Multi-Armed Bandits with Network Interference

Online experimentation with interference is a common challenge in modern applications such as e-commerce and adaptive clinical trials in medicine. For example, in online marketplaces, the revenue of a good depends on discounts applied to competing goods. Statistical inference with interference is widely studied in the offline setting, but far less is known about how to adaptively assign treatments to minimize regret. We address this gap by studying a multi-armed bandit (MAB) problem where a learner (e-commerce platform) sequentially assigns one of possible $\mathcal{A}$ actions (discounts) to $N$ units (goods) over $T$ rounds to minimize regret (maximize revenue). Unlike traditional MAB problems, the reward of each unit depends on the treatments assigned to other units, i.e., there is interference across the underlying network of units. With $\mathcal{A}$ actions and $N$ units, minimizing regret is combinatorially difficult since the action space grows as $\mathcal{A}^N$. To overcome this issue, we study a sparse network interference model, where the reward of a unit is only affected by the treatments assigned to $s$ neighboring units. We use tools from discrete Fourier analysis to develop a sparse linear representation of the unit-specific reward $r_n: [\mathcal{A}]^N \rightarrow \mathbb{R} $, and propose simple, linear regression-based algorithms to minimize regret. Importantly, our algorithms achieve provably low regret both when the learner observes the interference neighborhood for all units and when it is unknown. This significantly generalizes other works on this topic which impose strict conditions on the strength of interference on a known network, and also compare regret to a markedly weaker optimal action. Empirically, we corroborate our theoretical findings via numerical simulations.

cs.LG↗

Double trouble: Predicting new variant counts across two heterogeneous populations

Collecting genomics data across multiple heterogeneous populations (e.g., across different cancer types) has the potential to improve our understanding of disease. Despite sequencing advances, though, resources often remain a constraint when gathering data. So it would be useful for experimental design if experimenters with access to a pilot study could predict the number of new variants they might expect to find in a follow-up study: both the number of new variants shared between the populations and the total across the populations. While many authors have developed prediction methods for the single-population case, we show that these predictions can fare poorly across multiple populations that are heterogeneous. We prove that, surprisingly, a natural extension of a state-of-the-art single-population predictor to multiple populations fails for fundamental reasons. We provide the first predictor for the number of new shared variants and new total variants that can handle heterogeneity in multiple populations. We show that our proposed method works well empirically using real cancer and population genetics data.

stat.ME↗

Improved prediction of future user activity in online A/B testing

In online randomized experiments or A/B tests, accurate predictions of participant inclusion rates are of paramount importance. These predictions not only guide experimenters in optimizing the experiment's duration but also enhance the precision of treatment effect estimates. In this paper we present a novel, straightforward, and scalable Bayesian nonparametric approach for predicting the rate at which individuals will be exposed to interventions within the realm of online A/B testing. Our approach stands out by offering dual prediction capabilities: it forecasts both the quantity of new customers expected in future time windows and, unlike available alternative methods, the number of times they will be observed. We derive closed-form expressions for the posterior distributions of the quantities needed to form predictions about future user activity, thereby bypassing the need for numerical algorithms such as Markov chain Monte Carlo. After a comprehensive exposition of our model, we test its performance on experiments on real and simulated data, where we show its superior performance with respect to existing alternatives in the literature.

stat.ME↗

A Nonparametric Bayes Approach to Online Activity Prediction

Accurately predicting the onset of specific activities within defined timeframes holds significant importance in several applied contexts. In particular, accurate prediction of the number of future users that will be exposed to an intervention is an important piece of information for experimenters running online experiments (A/B tests). In this work, we propose a novel approach to predict the number of users that will be active in a given time period, as well as the temporal trajectory needed to attain a desired user participation threshold. We model user activity using a Bayesian nonparametric approach which allows us to capture the underlying heterogeneity in user engagement. We derive closed-form expressions for the number of new users expected in a given period, and a simple Monte Carlo algorithm targeting the posterior distribution of the number of days needed to attain a desired number of users; the latter is important for experimental planning. We illustrate the performance of our approach via several experiments on synthetic and real world data, in which we show that our novel method outperforms existing competitors.

stat.ME↗

Independent finite approximations for Bayesian nonparametric inference

Completely random measures (CRMs) and their normalizations (NCRMs) offer flexible models in Bayesian nonparametrics. But their infinite dimensionality presents challenges for inference. Two popular finite approximations are truncated finite approximations (TFAs) and independent finite approximations (IFAs). While the former have been well-studied, IFAs lack similarly general bounds on approximation error, and there has been no systematic comparison between the two options. In the present work, we propose a general recipe to construct practical finite-dimensional approximations for homogeneous CRMs and NCRMs, in the presence or absence of power laws. We call our construction the automated independent finite approximation (AIFA). Relative to TFAs, we show that AIFAs facilitate more straightforward derivations and use of parallel computing in approximate inference. We upper bound the approximation error of AIFAs for a wide class of common CRMs and NCRMs -- and thereby develop guidelines for choosing the approximation level. Our lower bounds in key cases suggest that our upper bounds are tight. We prove that, for worst-case choices of observation likelihoods, TFAs are more efficient than AIFAs. Conversely, we find that in real-data experiments with standard likelihoods, AIFAs and TFAs perform similarly. Moreover, we demonstrate that AIFAs can be used for hyperparameter estimation even when other potential IFA options struggle or do not apply.

stat.ME↗

Cross-Study Replicability in Cluster Analysis

In cancer research, clustering techniques are widely used for exploratory analyses and dimensionality reduction, playing a critical role in the identification of novel cancer subtypes, often with direct implications for patient management. As data collected by multiple research groups grows, it is increasingly feasible to investigate the replicability of clustering procedures, that is, their ability to consistently recover biologically meaningful clusters across several datasets. In this paper, we review existing methods to assess replicability of clustering analyses, and discuss a framework for evaluating cross-study clustering replicability, useful when two or more studies are available. These approaches can be applied to any clustering algorithm and can employ different measures of similarity between partitions to quantify replicability, globally (i.e. for the whole sample) as well as locally (i.e. for individual clusters). Using experiments on synthetic and real gene expression data, we illustrate the utility of replicability metrics to evaluate if the same clusters are identified consistently across a collection of datasets.

stat.ME↗

Leveraging covariate adjustments at scale in online A/B testing

Companies offering web services routinely run randomized online experiments to estimate the causal impact associated with the adoption of new features and policies on key performance metrics of interest. These experiments are used to estimate a variety of effects: the increase in click rate due to the repositioning of a banner, the impact on subscription rate as a consequence of a discount or special offer, etc. In these settings, even effects whose sizes are very small can have large downstream impacts. The simple difference in means estimator (Splawa-Neyman et al., 1990) is still the standard estimator of choice for many online A/B testing platforms due to its simplicity. This method, however, can fail to detect small effects, even when the experiment contains thousands or millions of observational units. As a by-product of these experiments, however, large amounts of additional data (covariates) are collected. In this paper, we discuss benefits, costs and risks of allowing experimenters to leverage more complicated estimators that make use of covariates when estimating causal effects of interest. We adapt a recently proposed general-purpose algorithm for the estimation of causal effects with covariates to the setting of online A/B tests. Through this paradigm, we implement several covariate-adjusted causal estimators. We thoroughly evaluate their performance at scale, highlighting benefits and shortcomings of different methods. We show on real experiments how "covariate-adjusted" estimators can (i) lead to more precise quantification of the causal effects of interest and (ii) fix issues related to imbalance across treatment arms - a practical concern often overlooked in the literature. In turn, (iii) these more precise estimates can reduce experimentation time, cutting cost and helping to streamline decision-making processes, allowing for faster adoption of beneficial interventions.

stat.ME↗

Scaled process priors for Bayesian nonparametric estimation of the unseen genetic variation

There is a growing interest in the estimation of the number of unseen features, mostly driven by biological applications. A recent work brought out a peculiar property of the popular completely random measures (CRMs) as prior models in Bayesian nonparametric (BNP) inference for the unseen-features problem: for fixed prior's parameters, they all lead to a Poisson posterior distribution for the number of unseen features, which depends on the sampling information only through the sample size. CRMs are thus not a flexible prior model for the unseen-features problem and, while the Poisson posterior distribution may be appealing for analytical tractability and ease of interpretability, its independence from the sampling information makes the BNP approach a questionable oversimplification, with posterior inferences being completely determined by the estimation of unknown prior's parameters. In this paper, we introduce the stable-Beta scaled process (SB-SP) prior, and we show that it allows to enrich the posterior distribution of the number of unseen features arising under CRM priors, while maintaining its analytical tractability and interpretability. That is, the SB-SP prior leads to a negative Binomial posterior distribution, which depends on the sampling information through the sample size and the number of distinct features, with corresponding estimates being simple, linear in the sampling information and computationally efficient. We apply our BNP approach to synthetic data and to real cancer genomic data, showing that: i) it outperforms the most popular parametric and nonparametric competitors in terms of estimation accuracy; ii) it provides improved coverage for the estimation with respect to a BNP approach under CRM priors.

stat.ME↗

Bayesian nonparametric strategies for power maximization in rare variants association studies

Rare variants are hypothesized to be largely responsible for heritability and susceptibility to disease in humans. So rare variants association studies hold promise for understanding disease. Conversely though, the rareness of the variants poses practical challenges; since these variants are present in few individuals, it can be difficult to develop data-collection and statistical methods that effectively leverage their sparse information. In this work, we develop a novel Bayesian nonparametric model to capture how design choices in rare variants association studies can impact their usefulness. We then show how to use our model to guide design choices under a fixed experimental budget in practice. In particular, we provide a practical workflow and illustrative experiments on simulated data.

stat.ME↗

More for less: Predicting and maximizing genetic variant discovery via Bayesian nonparametrics

While the cost of sequencing genomes has decreased dramatically in recent years, this expense often remains non-trivial. Under a fixed budget, then, scientists face a natural trade-off between quantity and quality; they can spend resources to sequence a greater number of genomes (quantity) or spend resources to sequence genomes with increased accuracy (quality). Our goal is to find the optimal allocation of resources between quantity and quality. Optimizing resource allocation promises to reveal as many new variations in the genome as possible, and thus as many new scientific insights as possible. In this paper, we consider the common setting where scientists have already conducted a pilot study to reveal variants in a genome and are contemplating a follow-up study. We introduce a Bayesian nonparametric methodology to predict the number of new variants in the follow-up study based on the pilot study. When experimental conditions are kept constant between the pilot and follow-up, we demonstrate on real data from the gnomAD project that our prediction is more accurate than three recent proposals, and competitive with a more classic proposal. Unlike existing methods, though, our method allows practitioners to change experimental conditions between the pilot and the follow-up. We demonstrate how this distinction allows our method to be used for (i) more realistic predictions and (ii) optimal allocation of a fixed budget between quality and quantity.

stat.ME↗