mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

What a Data Release Must Preserve for Off-Policy Evaluation

arXiv 2610.15283 ↗First posted 11 Oct 2026stat.ML cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In off-policy evaluation, merging decision-time histories that matter differently for a specified policy value or comparison can make that evaluation unidentified, even with observed actions and outcomes and known behavior and target policies. We characterize which distinctions must be preserved: identification holds if and only if the action-specific evaluation weights are constant within each released record, and the coarsest exact release groups histories by these weights. For normalized outcomes, the largest sharp width induced by the release equals a behavior-weighted within-record radius of these weights. The same radius becomes a release-design objective when each record may be refined into at most m categories. The optimum has an exact m-center characterization. When behavior does not vary within a released record, we give a finite-data repair algorithm whose maximum evaluation-weight radius is at most twice the finite-data optimum. For a fixed action-outcome distribution within a released record, a distinct sharp-identification problem remains. Under the same condition, the action-specific outcome distributions are identified, and optimizing over their couplings gives the sharp interval. We construct an AIPW envelope containing this sharp interval; it matches the interval for all such outcome distributions exactly when the extreme within-record action-coefficient vectors take at most two values in each action coordinate. In 24 KuaiRec tasks, the repair algorithm yields a 93% median reduction in mean pairwise sharp width at m=64 relative to the unrepaired release.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Oct 2026.

Builds on

15 of 31 references.

References · 15

  1. 2022KuaiRec: A Fully-observed Dataset and Insights for Evaluating Recommender Systemscited by 96
  2. 2021A Minimax Learning Approach to Off-Policy Evaluation in Confounded Partially Observable Markov Decision Processescited by 36
  3. 2019Conditional Importance Sampling for Off-Policy Learningcited by 13
  4. 2022Partial Identification with Noisy Covariates: A Robust Optimization Approachcited by 11
  5. 2026Remember the Decision, Not the Description: A Rate-Distortion Framework for Agent Memorycited by 7
  6. 2023State-Action Similarity-Based Representations for Off-Policy Evaluationcited by 4
  7. 2023When is Off-Policy Evaluation (Reward Modeling) Useful in Contextual Bandits? A Data-Centric Perspectivecited by 4
  8. 2024Off-policy Evaluation with Deeply-abstracted Statescited by 4
  9. 2026Logging Policy Design for Off-Policy Evaluationcited by 4
  10. 2024Abstract Reward Processes: Leveraging State Abstraction for Consistent Off-Policy Evaluationcited by 3
  11. 2024Bridging multiple worlds: multi-marginal optimal transport for causal partial-identification problemcited by 2
  12. 2026The hidden risks of temporal resampling in clinical reinforcement learningcited by 2
3 more
  1. 2026Target-Oriented Statistical Compression: Sufficiency, Reverse Martingales, and Sequential Monitoringcited by 1
  2. 2026Quotient DAGs for Off-Policy Evaluation:Forward-Flow Importance Sampling and Exact Slate Propensitiescited by 1
  3. 2026Privacy-Robust Incrementality Measurement for Advertising Systems under Signal Losscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.