# Inference for Batched Adaptive Experiments

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.10156 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.10156/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 3 of its 10 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Dec 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Confidence Intervals for Policy Evaluation in Adaptive Experiments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02768/) (2019)
- [Inference for Batched Bandits](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.03217/) (2020)
- [Stratification Trees for Adaptive Randomization in Randomized Controlled Trials](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.05127/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [FinInvest-GTCN: Explainable Graph-Temporal-Causal Modeling for Risk-Aware Investment Decision Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.28933/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The advantages of adaptive experiments have led to their rapid adoption in economics, other fields, as well as among practitioners. However, adaptive experiments pose challenges for causal inference. This note suggests a BOLS (batched ordinary least squares) test statistic for inference of treatment effects in adaptive experiments. The statistic provides a precision-equalizing aggregation of per-period treatment-control differences under heteroskedasticity. The combined test statistic is a normalized average of heteroskedastic per-period z-statistics and can be used to construct asymptotically valid confidence intervals. We provide simulation results comparing rejection rates in the typical case with few treatment periods and few (or many) observations per batch.