ML Reads

Personal arXiv list

ML papers to read today.

Pick a topic and keep a small daily list of papers worth opening.

Refresh queueDaily mix

Today's queue

5 papers

#01Nov 4, 2026

econ.EM

Regression with Many Generated Controls

Timothy Christensen, Daniel Vebman

We consider linear regression when some covariates are endogenous, a variable sufficient to control for endogeneity exists but is latent, and the practitioner can generate many proxies for the latent control. For instance, one could cheaply but imperfectly impute the latent control using different AI/ML methods, each generating a different proxy. There are several options the practitioner might consider in this scenario: including all proxies or factors computed from the proxies as controls, instrumental variables estimation, and some nonlinear variants thereof. We use a transparent model to derive the implicit estimand each approach targets, determine when these estimands recover the parameter of interest, and provide some practical recommendations. We show that with a sufficiently rich set of generated controls, practitioners can consistently estimate the parameter of interest without relying on validation data.

#02Nov 4, 2026

cs.CL

Ranking Agreement Does Not Reveal Paragraph-Edit Agreement in Two Released Paper Acceptance Predictors

Shaoliang Yang, Jun Wang

A fast acceptance classifier could select revisions for a slower evaluator. We ask whether agreement on existing papers supports that use. We compare a classifier of word and document features with two released text-only acceptance predictors fine-tuned from the same language model with three billion parameters. For 198 papers from the International Conference on Learning Representations, we compare model rankings of the original papers and of paragraph rewrites screened automatically for unchanged facts, claim strength, and attribution. The classifier ranks original papers closely with one predictor and moderately with the other, but shows no detectable agreement with either on which rewrites raise scores. The tests specified in advance used reduced numerical precision. Rounding error dominated the small score responses. We therefore rescored the released weights in full 32-bit precision as a post hoc check; edit agreement remained near zero. At this precision, when each predictor chooses among five rewrites per paper, its average raw score is under two points out of 100 higher than with random choice. The evidence covers presentation rewrites and two open predictors from one family; transfer to costly evaluators remains untested. Revision selectors should therefore be checked against the intended evaluator on the revisions they rank.

#03Nov 4, 2026

cs.CV

CounterFactual Retrieval for Evidence-Aware Individual Animal Identification

Ankit K. Upadhyay, Aleksandr Algasov, Ekaterina Nepovinnykh and 5 more

Automated identification of individual animals is moving from small curated studies toward shared benchmarks and reusable foundation models. This progress is useful, but current evaluation leaves the evidence behind a match unresolved, i.e., high retrieval accuracy does not show whether a model used animal features or identity-correlated shortcuts. We address this with Counterfactual Foreground Retrieval (CFR), an evidence-aware evaluation protocol. CFR evaluates the same query-gallery task under different views: full image, foreground-only, and shortcut-only. The full-image measures standard retrieval performance; the foreground-only measures foreground-supported retrieval; and shortcut-only view measure how much identity signal is recoverable from background, or silhouette. This turns a retrieval score into an evidence profile: how well the model performs on the original images, how much of that performance remains when only the animal is visible, and how much identity signal remains recoverable when the animal is removed. We release around 0.5M masks for 34 datasets and code for mask generation and CFR evaluation.

#04Nov 4, 2026

cs.LG

Continual Classification Beyond the Kernel Regime: Harnessing the Sparsity Bias of L2 Regularization in Diagonal Linear Networks

Gilad Karpel, Itay Evron, Ron Meir and 1 more

We study logistic regression for continual learning with linear predictors in a high-dimensional statistical setting. Existing theoretical work has largely focused on continual linear regression with variants of L2 regularization, motivated by their analytical simplicity and connection to the kernel regime of neural networks. We first derive the optimal L2 regularization strength for continual linear classification and characterize its generalization performance, recovering behavior analogous to prior results for continual linear regression. Next, we examine the effect of L2 regularization in deeper models using a minimal two-layer diagonal linear network. In the single-task setting, L2 regularization on the weights of such models is known to promote sparsity in the resulting predictor, yielding a rich, sparse feature-learning regime beyond the kernel regime (a similar effect arises in two-layer ReLU networks). However, in continual learning, where L2 regularization is typically centered on previous-task weights, this sparsity bias is no longer preserved. We therefore propose a weighted variant of L2 regularization that extends this beneficial sparsity bias to continual learning. We show theoretically and empirically that, for a sufficiently sparse teacher, our variant converges substantially faster than directly learning a linear predictor with conventional continual L2 or L1 regularization, trading some long-horizon bias for markedly improved performance over moderate task horizons.

#05Nov 4, 2026

cs.CL

Balancing hierarchical representation and quantization: A performance trade-off in text embeddings

Kai Ponel, Marco Polignano, Erasmo Purificato and 4 more

Hierarchical text embedding models offer variable-length representations, while quantization reduces numerical precision; both aim to improve computational efficiency. This work is an empirical benchmark study of how these two orthogonal, already-established techniques interact. We evaluate 38 tasks from the Massive Text Embedding Benchmark (MTEB) using four transformer-based embedding models, covering 1D and 2D hierarchical representations combined with 32-bit, 8-bit, and binary quantization, for 168 configurations per task. We report each efficiency dimension separately: theoretical per-vector storage and end-to-end evaluation time. Under a Friedman test with Nemenyi post-hoc analysis, int8 quantization is statistically indistinguishable from float32 for pair classification and re-ranking and costs at most 1.5 percentage points overall, whereas binary quantization is significantly worse across every task category. Halving the embedding dimension once is not statistically detectable above $m=16$; two successive halvings always are. Combining an 8x dimensionality reduction with int8 yields a 32x reduction in per-vector storage at 94.4% of baseline effectiveness. Because evaluation times were measured once, we treat them as indicative: we find no evidence that quantization speeds up evaluation, whereas sampling from intermediate layers shortens it substantially. Retrieval degrades far faster than every other category, so we report findings per task category.