Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2007.02633

Surprise sampling: improving and extending the local case-control sampling

Xinwei Shen·Kani Chen·Wen Yu
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Fithian and Hastie (2014) proposed a new sampling scheme called local case-control (LCC) sampling that achieves stability and efficiency by utilizing a clever adjustment pertained to the logistic model. It is particularly useful for classification with large and imbalanced data. This paper proposes a more general sampling scheme based on a working principle that data points deserve higher sampling probability if they contain more information or appear "surprising" in the sense of, for example, a large error of pilot prediction or a large absolute score. Compared with the relevant existing sampling schemes, as reported in Fithian and Hastie (2014) and Ai, et al. (2018), the proposed one has several advantages. It adaptively gives out the optimal forms to a variety of objectives, including the LCC and Ai et al. (2018)'s sampling as special cases. Under same model specifications, the proposed estimator also performs no worse than those in the literature. The estimation procedure is valid even if the model is misspecified and/or the pilot estimator is inconsistent or dependent on full data. We present theoretical justifications of the claimed advantages and optimality of the estimation and the sampling design. Different from Ai, et al. (2018), our large sample theory are population-wise rather than data-wise. Moreover, the proposed approach can be applied to unsupervised learning studies, since it essentially only requires a specific loss function and no response-covariate structure of data is needed. Numerical studies are carried out and the evidence in support of the theory is shown.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Xinwei Shen, Kani Chen, Wen Yu. 2020-07-06. Surprise sampling: improving and extending the local case-control sampling. https://doi.org/10.1214/21-ejs1844

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗