Skip to content

The Price of Self-Calibration: Exact Evidence Budgets and Manufactured Blind Sets in Adaptive Monitoring

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 26 references
Computer Science Engineering Mathematics

Abstract

Self-calibrating monitors adapt their threshold online to guarantee a prescribed long-run false-alarm rate under arbitrary drift. We compute the price of that guarantee, stating every law with its exact domain of validity. First, the guarantee is an accounting identity, insensitive to what the monitor is meant to detect. Two evidence identities make the cost exact for the online quantile tracker: a persistent step of height $\delta$ yields excess alarm mass within one alarm of $\delta/\eta$, and exactly $\delta/\eta$ pathwise when $\delta$ is a lattice multiple of the gain $\eta$; a ramp of slope $c$ yields a stationary excess rate of exactly $c/\eta$, independent of accumulated size, up to a boundary $c=\eta(1-\alpha)$ coinciding with the alarm-rate cap. Second, the certificate's own fluctuation obeys an exact law: the windowed alarm rate has standard deviation of order $1/L$, not the binomial $1/\sqrt{L}$, since the windowed mass telescopes to a difference of a tight internal state; the closed-form constant is validated with no fitted parameter. Detectors calibrated on the binomial scale are miscalibrated by $\sqrt{\eta\varphi(q_0)L}$, and correct calibration turns detection windows from quadratic to linear in the inverse fault speed. Third, any monitor required to tolerate a drift class $\mathcal{D}$ is blind, at any horizon and for any rule, to every fault in $\mathcal{D}-\mathcal{D}$; the proof is a deliberately elementary two-point argument and the contribution is the object it identifies: for speed-bounded classes the blind set is exactly the doubled-speed class, and the tracker absorbs a speed class fixed by its own gain, so that under a certification regime declaring absorbed drift normal, the monitor manufactures $\mathcal{D}$. An exact Gaussian projection bound, sharper than Pinsker and never vacuous, quantifies power outside it.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Conference Open access Jun 2018

Gibson Env: Real-World Perception for Embodied Agents

This paper investigates developing real-world perception for active agents, proposes Gibson Environment for this purpose, and showcases a set of perceptual tasks learned therein.

F. Xia, Amir Zamir, Zhi-Yang He et al. · 1,069 citations · ⚡112
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Diffusion models as plug-and-play priors

The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.

Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al. · 316 citations · ⚡15

Trajectory Balance: Improved Credit Assignment in GFlowNets

It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...

Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al. · 302 citations · ⚡60

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 23, 2026

Q&A: How AI came to model the “messy” human mind

Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.