ICML 2025 论文列表

This paper examines the systemic risks posed by incremental advancements in artificial intelligence, developing the concept of `gradual disempowerment', in contrast to the abrupt takeover scenarios commonly discussed in AI safety. We analyze how even incremental improvements in AI capabilities can undermine human influence over large-scale systems that society depends on, including the economy, culture, and nation-states. As AI increasingly replaces human labor and cognition in these domains, it can weaken both explicit human control mechanisms (like voting and consumer choice) and the implicit alignments with human preferences that often arise from societal systems' reliance on human participation to function. Furthermore, AI systems may amplify existing misalignments with human preferences by optimizing these systems more powerfully. These distortions across domains may be mutually reinforcing: economic power shapes cultural narratives and political decisions, while cultural shifts alter economic and political behavior. We argue that this dynamic could lead to an effectively irreversible loss of human influence over crucial societal systems, precipitating an existential catastrophe through the permanent disempowerment of humanity. This analysis suggests the need for both technical research and governance approaches that specifically address the risk of incremental erosion of human influence across interconnected societal systems.

We study risk-sensitive RL where the goal is learn a history-dependent policy that optimizes some risk measure of cumulative rewards. We consider a family of risks called the optimized certainty equivalents (OCE), which captures important risk measures such as conditional value-at-risk (CVaR), entropic risk and Markowitz's mean-variance. In this setting, we propose two meta-algorithms: one grounded in optimism and another based on policy gradients, both of which can leverage the broad suite of risk-neutral RL algorithms in an augmented Markov Decision Process (MDP). Via a reductions approach, we leverage theory for risk-neutral RL to establish novel OCE bounds in complex, rich-observation MDPs. For the optimism-based algorithm, we prove bounds that generalize prior results in CVaR RL and that provide the first risk-sensitive bounds for exogenous block MDPs. For the gradient-based algorithm, we establish both monotone improvement and global convergence guarantees under a discrete reward assumption. Finally, we empirically show that our algorithms learn the optimal history-dependent policy in a proof-of-concept MDP, where all Markovian policies provably fail.

Compositional generalization is a crucial step towards developing data-efficient intelligent machines that generalize in human-like ways. In this work, we tackle a challenging form of distribution shift, termed compositional shift, where some attribute combinations are completely absent at training but present in the test distribution. This shift tests the model's ability to generalize compositionally to novel attribute combinations in discriminative tasks. We model the data with flexible additive energy distributions, where each energy term represents an attribute, and derive a simple alternative to empirical risk minimization termed compositional risk minimization (CRM). We first train an additive energy classifier to predict the multiple attributes and then adjust this classifier to tackle compositional shifts. We provide an extensive theoretical analysis of CRM, where we show that our proposal extrapolates to special affine hulls of seen attribute combinations. Empirical evaluations on benchmark datasets confirms the improved robustness of CRM compared to other methods from the literature designed to tackle various forms of subpopulation shifts.

In this work, we develop a hypothesis testing framework to determine whether pairwise comparison data is generated by an underlying *generalized Thurstone model* $\mathcal{T}_F$ for a given choice function $F$. While prior work has predominantly focused on parameter estimation and uncertainty quantification for such models, we address the fundamental problem of minimax hypothesis testing for $\mathcal{T}_F$ models. We formulate this testing problem by introducing a notion of separation distance between general pairwise comparison models and the class of $\mathcal{T}_F$ models. We then derive upper and lower bounds on the critical threshold for testing that depend on the topology of the observation graph. For the special case of complete observation graphs, this threshold scales as $\Theta((nk)^{-1/2})$, where $n$ is the number of agents and $k$ is the number of comparisons per pair. Furthermore, we propose a hypothesis test based on our separation distance, construct confidence intervals, establish time-uniform bounds on the probabilities of type I and II errors using reverse martingale techniques, and derive minimax lower bounds using information-theoretic methods. Finally, we validate our results through experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets.

As machine learning models grow increasingly competent, their predictions can supplement scarce or expensive data in various important domains. In support of this paradigm, algorithms have emerged to combine a small amount of high-fidelity observed data with a much larger set of imputed model outputs to estimate some quantity of interest. Yet current hybrid-inference tools target only means or single quantiles, limiting their applicability for many critical domains and use cases. We present QuEst, a principled framework to merge observed and imputed data to deliver point estimates and rigorous confidence intervals for a wide family of quantile-based distributional measures. QuEst covers a range of measures, from tail risk (CVaR) to population segments such as quartiles, that are central to fields such as economics, sociology, education, medicine, and more. We extend QuEst to multidimensional metrics, and introduce an additional optimization technique to further reduce variance in this and other hybrid estimators. We demonstrate the utility of our framework through experiments in economic modeling, opinion polling, and language model auto-evaluation.

The Risk Difference (RD), an absolute measure of effect, is widely used and well-studied in both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Complementary to the RD, the Risk Ratio (RR), as a relative measure, is critical for a comprehensive understanding of intervention effects: RD can downplay small absolute changes, while RR can highlight them. Despite its significance, the theoretical study of RR has received less attention, particularly in observational settings. This paper addresses this gap by tackling the estimation of RR in observational data. We propose several RR estimators and establish their theoretical properties, including asymptotic normality and confidence intervals. Through analyses on simulated and real-world datasets, we evaluate the performance of these estimators in terms of bias, efficiency, and robustness to generative data models. We also examine the coverage and length of the associated confidence intervals. Due to the non-linear nature of RR, influence function theory yields two distinct efficient estimators with different convergence assumptions. Based on theoretical and empirical insights, we recommend, among all estimators, one of the two doubly-robust estimators, which, intriguingly, challenges conventional expectations.

Ensemble learning is a powerful approach for improving generalization under distribution shifts, but its effectiveness heavily depends on how individual models are combined. Existing methods often optimize ensemble weights based on validation data, which may not represent unseen test distributions, leading to suboptimal performance in out-of-distribution (OoD) settings. Inspired by Distributionally Robust Optimization (DRO), we propose Structure-informed Risk Minimization (SRM), a principled framework that learns robust ensemble weights without access to test data. Unlike standard DRO, which defines uncertainty sets based on divergence metrics alone, SRM incorporates structural information of training distributions, ensuring that the uncertainty set aligns with plausible real-world shifts. This approach mitigates the over-pessimism of traditional worst-case optimization while maintaining robustness. We introduce a computationally efficient optimization algorithm with theoretical guarantees and demonstrate that SRM achieves superior OoD generalization compared to existing ensemble combination strategies across diverse benchmarks. Code is available at: https://github.com/deep-real/SRM.