The Lagrangian Structure of Cost-Penalized Active Feature Acquisition

arXiv:2610.21919 · cs.LG · Submitted 2026-10-15 · Read on arXiv

cs.LG

Submitted: 2026-10-15

Updated: 2026-10-15

Comments: 52 pages

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

The gist: Active Feature Acquisition (AFA) sequentially selects features to maximize predictive accuracy under an acquisition budget.

Abstract

Active Feature Acquisition (AFA) sequentially selects features to maximize predictive accuracy under an acquisition budget. A natural heuristic greedily maximizes Expected Information Gain minus a cost penalty, EIG(jx S)-lam*c j (EIG-Cost), but its theoretical guarantees are unclear. We provide an a-posteriori certificate decomposing the gap to the optimal hard-budget policy into a budget-slack term and a greedy-suboptimality term Del lam. The certificate is computable when the penalized optimum is tractable; on small heterogeneous-cost instances, we verify it exactly, finding Del lam near zero across 4,000 solved cases. On the large clinical task, Del lam is not computable, so the decomposition is diagnostic rather than a numerical guarantee. Our analysis identifies EIG-Cost as one-step greedy optimization of the Lagrangian relaxation of expected-cost AFA, with lam as its dual multiplier. For equal costs, we prove Del lam <= exp(-gam*I(Y;X[d])), where gam is the submodularity ratio, yielding a structural guarantee in the near-submodular regime. Supporting results establish an adaptive chain-rule identity showing that cumulative stepwise EIG optimizes transcript information, and prove that A -> I(Y;X A) need not be submodular, even for jointly Gaussian variables. This rules out a direct Nemhauser-Wolsey-Fisher bound; naive Bayes restores submodularity. We also bound the randomization gap between hard-budget and expected-cost optima, analyze sensitivity to dual-multiplier error under local smoothness, and derive a conditional CVAE generator-shift bound given a bound on forward predictive KL. We treat this KL as a diagnostic quantity, not as a transform of training loss. Experiments cover synthetic Gaussian settings, AFA benchmarks, and clinical differential diagnosis on MIMIC-IV. On MIMIC-IV, EIG-Cost achieves macro-F1 0.180 +/- 0.012 at a 30 budget, using 6.6% of full-panel cost.

Related papers