Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Assesses sensitivity bounds and restoration theory for latent parameters in coarsening, revealing implications for identification.
Coarsening at random (the conditions C1, C2, C3) makes a latent parameter identifiable and the face-value maximum-likelihood fit consistent, but the symmetry condition C2 is the exception rather than the rule: real coarsening is informative. This paper develops the theory for imperfect coarsening. We parametrize the violation of C2 by a tilt of magnitude delta and prove a sensitivity bound: the asymptotic bias of the face-value MLE is, at leading order, linear in delta with an explicit constant set by the covariance of the face-value score with the tilt, so the latent parameter is partially identified over a delta-ball that contracts to a point as C2 is approached. We then prove a restoration theorem: a singleton report (one that pins the latent value, hence classical internal validation) restores point identification, and the number of singletons needed to recover the r confounded directions is of order r over gamma-squared, where gamma is the domain identification margin. The two results unify the reliability sensitivity bands, the single-cell spike-in bias, the weak-supervision gold-set sample complexity, and the differential-privacy mechanism partition as one structured-coarsening sensitivity-and-restoration theory, and place the coarsening program in the lineage of missing-not-at-random sensitivity analysis, measurement-error double sampling, and verification-bias correction. It is the C2-violation companion to the coarsening-at-random synthesis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alexander Towell (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: