Nicola Gnecco

Nicola Gnecco, Jonas Peters, Sebastian Engelke et al.

Modern machine learning methods and the availability of large-scale data have significantly advanced our ability to predict target quantities from large sets of covariates. However, these methods often struggle under distributional shifts, particularly in the presence of hidden confounding. While the impact of hidden confounding is well-studied in causal effect estimation, e.g., instrumental variables, its implications for prediction tasks under shifting distributions remain underexplored. This work addresses this gap by introducing a strong notion of invariance that, unlike existing weaker notions, allows for distribution generalization even in the presence of nonlinear, non-identifiable structural functions. Central to this framework is the Boosted Control Function (BCF), a novel, identifiable target of inference that satisfies the proposed strong invariance notion and is provably worst-case optimal under distributional shifts. The theoretical foundation of our work lies in Simultaneous Equation Models for Distribution Generalization (SIMDGs), which bridge machine learning with econometrics by describing data-generating processes under distributional shifts. To put these insights into practice, we propose the ControlTwicing algorithm to estimate the BCF using nonparametric machine-learning techniques and study its generalization performance on synthetic and real-world datasets compared to robust and empirical risk minimization approaches.

Sebastian Engelke, Nicola Gnecco, Anne Sabourin

Extreme value theory provides rigorous theory and statistical tools for extrapolation in machine learning, particularly in settings where traditional methods struggle due to data scarcity in the tails. A broad range of tasks benefit from these advances, including regression and classification beyond the training data, extreme quantile regression, supervised and unsupervised dimension reduction, generative artificial intelligence and anomaly detection. This review synthesizes recent developments in these fields at the intersection of statistical learning and extreme value theory, with a focus on principled methods based on asymptotically motivated representations of the tail of univariate and multivariate distributions. We consider different theoretical frameworks for both asymptotically dependent and independent data and discuss how they translate into efficient statistical methods for extrapolation to extreme regions. By addressing both theoretical and practical aspects, we offer a comprehensive overview of the state-of-the-art in this quickly evolving field, and identify promising directions for future research.

Julia Kostin, Nicola Gnecco, Fanny Yang

In safety-critical applications, machine learning models should generalize well under worst-case distribution shifts, that is, have a small robust risk. Invariance-based algorithms can provably take advantage of structural assumptions on the shifts when the training distributions are heterogeneous enough to identify the robust risk. However, in practice, such identifiability conditions are rarely satisfied -- a scenario so far underexplored in the theoretical literature. In this paper, we aim to fill the gap and propose to study the more general setting when the robust risk is only partially identifiable. In particular, we introduce the worst-case robust risk as a new measure of robustness that is always well-defined regardless of identifiability. Its minimum corresponds to an algorithm-independent (population) minimax quantity that measures the best achievable robustness under partial identifiability. While these concepts can be defined more broadly, in this paper we introduce and derive them explicitly for a linear model for concreteness of the presentation. First, we show that existing robustness methods are provably suboptimal in the partially identifiable case. We then evaluate these methods and the minimizer of the (empirical) worst-case robust risk on real-world gene expression data and find a similar trend: the test error of existing robustness methods grows increasingly suboptimal as the fraction of data from unseen environments increases, whereas accounting for partial identifiability allows for better generalization.