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

cs.LG

FedFiOT: Fisher-Weighted Optimal Transport for Model Merging in One-Shot and Few-Round Federated Learning

Quan Minh Nguyen, Hoang M. Ngo, Bhakti Chowkwale and 2 more

One-shot and few-round federated learning (FL) reduce communication burden by constructing a global model within one or a few communication rounds, but often achieve lower performance than conventional multi-round FL. Without frequent synchronization, client models may drift apart, causing neurons that learn similar features to occupy different positions across clients. At the same time, local data heterogeneity can cause corresponding parameters to differ in their importance to each client's predictions. Together, these challenges cause direct averaging to combine mismatched neurons and assign equal weight to parameters despite differences in their importance. We propose FedFiOT, a Fisher-weighted optimal transport framework for one-shot and few-round FL that leverages Fisher information to quantify parameter importance and guide neuron alignment and model aggregation. FedFiOT jointly optimizes neuron correspondences and global model parameters through alternating minimization of a shared Fisher-weighted objective. Theoretically, we show that FedFiOT's optimization procedure monotonically decreases the layer-wise merging objective and establish a stationarity bound that quantifies the effects of client heterogeneity and nonuniform Fisher weighting.Experiments across multiple datasets demonstrate consistent improvements over competing baselines in both one-shot and few-round federated learning settings.

#02Nov 4, 2026

cs.RO

Perceptive Humanoid Motion from Simulation

Siyuan Hu, Abulikemu Abuduweili, Yue Meng and 5 more

Humanoid robots have the potential to automate a wide range of physical tasks. Progress toward generalist humanoid autonomy, however, remains constrained by a data bottleneck: mapping pixels and free-form language to low-level joint commands requires paired supervision, and no corpus of such data exists at sufficiently large scale. Some approaches rely on human teleoperation and wearable capture devices, which require at least an hour of human time to produce an hour of data. We present HALO, a humanoid autonomy system powered by a pipeline that synthesizes vision-language-motion data across a thousand procedurally generated homes. The corpus scales with compute rather than human labor. HALO acquires a repertoire of physical skills, including sitting on chairs, navigating to named objects, stepping sideways through half-open doors, crouching and crawling beneath tables, and pushing boxes. It orchestrates these skills to solve composite, long-horizon tasks. Without ever seeing a real home during training, HALO transfers zero-shot to the physical world, achieving a 91% success rate across 360 trials in six unmapped real-world environments. See https://apple-aiml-research.github.io/ml-halo/ for code and videos.

#03Nov 4, 2026

cs.LG

Navigating Disagreement Among Criteria for Evaluating Explanation Faithfulness

Grant Shanklin, Jiří Němeček, Asia Biega

Faithfulness requires that algorithmic explanations accurately reflect the model's behavior. Yet existing operationalizations of faithfulness can disagree about whether the same explanation is faithful, leaving developers and auditors to choose among conflicting evaluations. In this paper, we investigate disagreement among evaluation criteria and offer a practical path forward for evaluating explanation faithfulness. We first identify how operationalizations of faithfulness differ. We introduce a faithfulness functional that locates their disagreements in what an explanation claims about the model, which comparisons bear on that claim, and how agreement across those comparisons should be aggregated, and we reconstruct existing evaluation criteria within it. We argue these reconstructions support understanding faithfulness as a common though incompletely specified relation between the model and explanation, so the differences reflect choices left open by the general requirement. Justifying an operationalization then comes down to justifying these choices, which, on our view, draws on explanatory, institutional, and normative considerations. We support this argument with a case study of adverse action notices, reconstructing the evaluation implicit in an industry-proposed procedure and identifying which of its choices the setting justifies and which remain open. Our work gives auditors and practitioners a way to navigate disagreeing evaluations of faithfulness. It also explains why the literature should expect multiple operationalizations, while showing how concrete settings can narrow the choice among them. More broadly, our analysis shows how a shared requirement of faithfulness can support contextually justified evaluations despite disagreement among existing metrics.

#04Nov 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.

#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.