Michael O. Harding | Searcharxiv

arXiv2026

Learning from Biased and Costly Data Sources: Minimax-optimal Data Collection under a Budget

Data collection is a critical component of modern statistical and machine learning pipelines, particularly when data must be gathered from multiple heterogeneous sources to study a target population of interest. In many use cases, such as medical studies or political polling, different sources incur different sampling costs. Observations often have associated group identities - for example, health markers, demographics, or political affiliations - and the relative composition of these groups may differ substantially, both among the source populations and between sources and target population. In this work, we study multi-source data collection under a fixed budget, focusing on the estimation of population means and group-conditional means. We show that naive data collection strategies (e.g. attempting to "match" the target distribution) or relying on standard estimators (e.g. sample mean) can be highly suboptimal. Instead, we develop a sampling plan which maximizes the effective sample size - the total sample size divided by $D_{\chi^2}(q\mid\mid\overline{p}) + 1$, where $q$ is the target distribution, $\overline{p}$ is the aggregated source distribution, and $D_{\chi^2}$ is the $\chi^2$-divergence. We pair this sampling plan with a classical post-stratification estimator and upper bound its risk. We provide matching lower bounds, establishing that our approach achieves the budgeted minimax optimal risk. Our techniques also extend to prediction problems when minimizing the excess risk, providing a principled approach to multi-source learning with costly and heterogeneous data sources.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2025

Balancing Performance and Costs in Best Arm Identification

We consider the problem of identifying the best arm in a multi-armed bandit model. Despite a wealth of literature in the traditional fixed budget and fixed confidence regimes of the best arm identification problem, it still remains a mystery to most practitioners as to how to choose an approach and corresponding budget or confidence parameter. We propose a new formalism to avoid this dilemma altogether by minimizing a risk functional which explicitly balances the performance of the recommended arm and the cost incurred by learning this arm. In this framework, a cost is incurred for each observation during the sampling phase, and upon recommending an arm, a performance penalty is incurred for identifying a suboptimal arm. The learner's goal is to minimize the sum of the penalty and cost. This new regime mirrors the priorities of many practitioners, e.g. maximizing profit in an A/B testing framework, better than classical fixed budget or confidence settings. We derive theoretical lower bounds for the risk of each of two choices for the performance penalty, the probability of misidentification and the simple regret, and propose an algorithm called DBCARE to match these lower bounds up to polylog factors on nearly all problem instances. We then demonstrate the performance of DBCARE on a number of simulated models, comparing to fixed budget and confidence algorithms to show the shortfalls of existing BAI paradigms on this problem.

stat.ML↗